RationalWiki:Saloon bar

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

Welcome, BoN
This is a place for general chit-chat about virtually anything that doesn't fit anywhere else.
For previous conversations, see the automagic barchives.

edit

RW financial update (stIcKy)

As some may remember there was a strike called at my university. The whole long protracted story of what went down is somewhat interesting and worth sharing (I think at least) once things have settled down enough that I feel "safe" in doing so. The gist of the situation is though I have lost about 35 percent of my pay this month due to the strike action. This is going to lead to two consequences for RationalWiki that I wanted to pass along:

1)Since I will barely be able to even make rent next month my solution is to run away to home for the holidays as early as possible and leach off my family for a month. This means I will be physically away from the server for close to a month. Everything has run smoothly for over a month now so I am optimistic there won't be a problem, and if there is we have more tools available than last time to try and fix it. But its something to be aware of.

2)I like to keep about $150 in RW funds in reserve to cover any emergencies. We have about $120 at the moment, however, I am going to have to tap into this to pay for the internet connection for December. Probably on the order of about $60-$70. Leaving our reserve about $100 short. So if you have not tossed a few bucks RW's way in a while it would be great if you considered it. There is no need for the funds right away, but I would like to get things back up to the $120-$150 range by January.

That's about it. tmtoulouse 00:32, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Bummer about the lost pay. I am in a similar position as you are at my university and (though there is no hint of a labour dispute at the moment) I would very much like to hear your thoughts on the whole shebang. I am somewhat ashamed to say that until a few moments ago I had never tossed any bucks RW's way. I've enjoyed this site for more than a year, and it's certainly worth keeping online. Thanks for all your hard work.-- Antifly ^{Merged with Infinity} 02:49, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I can't afford to donate again at the moment, but get paid in a couple of weeks so should be able to throw you another £20 then. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 08:54, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

If we wanted to contribute, how would we do so? MDB 14:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

here Bob Soles 14:21, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Can we word the little 'Donate' section on the sidebar more strongly? I suggest "Donate much needed funds to RationalWiki' or somesuch. DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 16:35, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

In all honesty, I find the donate section practically invisible. I didn't reven realize it was there till now. Which is normally good -- I wouldn't want the site to be reminiscent of PBS during pledge week -- but I was barely aware you even solicited donations. MDB 18:05, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I've added some formatting to MediaWiki:Common.css to make it stand out some more. The wording is at MediaWiki:Sidebar (only plain text works there, but it can be styled via css). Suggestions are welcome. -- Nx / talk 18:56, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

What does PayPal charge you to receive donations? Fedhaji (Talk) 18:35, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Not a whole lot, it scales depending on the donation, a few cents on the dollar mostly. tmtoulouse 19:02, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Donations get solicited every now and then, usually when Trent is strapped or news something new and shiny. This is one of those times. ^sshole 19:03, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Trent does FAR too much for this place, and if you appreciate his dump, hurl some cash his way. I've added some jaunty copy to add to the nice new loud orange panel. Suggestions welcome. DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 00:53, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Why not a flashing orange banner across the top of every page, with randomly selected entreaties to pony up? ħuman 01:15, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely, if it means Trent isn't licking dogfood out of cans. Whatever it takes. DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 01:28, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I think you're exaggerating a bit... have you even read what he said about the state of the RW finances up above? While I agree fully that RW shouldn't cost him any money, going into a sudden panic over the wording of the donation link is just silly. If you think it can be better, let's come up with something better at the sidebar talk page and install it. ħuman 8:37 pm, Today (UTC−5)

Exaggerating? Trent did say he may not able to pay his rent after all? Whatever. Anyway, I'm not "going into a panic", but I certainly see only benefit from rewording the currently lame call to action that is our Donations box. "Join the supporters"? If we had supporters, we wouldn't be needing to make a call out - the problem is we DON'T have supporters. The box clearly wasn't doing any work for us, as per MDB's comment above - even a long term user like him didn't even know how to donate. That's hardly a functioning system. Why not a 'Donate' bar permanently mounted above Recent Changes too? Maybe we can have some vote widget fun and vote for slogans? Can someone do that? DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 16:21, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

You fail at reading comprehension. "Since I will barely be able to even make rent next month" followed by his solution to no food money - go home for the hols. And the reason for the month's poverty is not RW it's the strike he was dragged into (and encouraged in by some of us). But I'm all for vote widgets and slogans. Chances are you'll have to figure them out yourself (hint, find one you like and copy the code) though. ħuman 04:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget folks that you can take out a RationalWiki subscription and pledge Π dollars (or multiples thereof) per month. This may not solve Trent's immediate predicament but pledging $6.28 (about the price of two pints) a month adds up to $75 a year. Half a dozen new pledgers could make a significant difference. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 14:52, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Is a PayPal account needed for the subscription, or is there another way of doing it? I've chucked in a donation, but would find it a lot easier if I could just set something like $10 per month.--^{Ask me about your mother} 15:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

IT would be easy to set up a standing order. Now, all I require from you is your bank account details and sort code. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 21:11, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Slogans

As per Doggedpersistence's suggestion above, here's my humble suggestions for a "Give to RW" slogan:

• Don't donate to RationalWiki until you hurt. Donate to RationalWiki until Conservapedia hurts.
• Donate to RationalWiki. The mind you save may belong to a homeschooler who will grow up to cure the disease that's going to kill you.
• Donate to RationalWiki, because Andrew Schlafly's mind already is a waste.

MDB 13:35, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Aren't those all a bit CP-centric? Well, maybe not the second one... ħuman 00:06, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Donate to RationalWiki! We won't go down on you, unless you pay us extra! Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 21:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

New template system (sticky)

Hi all. By now you might have noticed a bit of goings on so allow me to explain what the fight is about.

Nx has created a base template called Template:Messagebox, it has a very well defined style of an image with text to the right of it. As part of the re-branding he has given it a water mark background of the RationalWiki brain.

If you are seeing this instead of your message, type 2= before your message.

Under no circumstances should anyone edit this template. It has been used on nearly 6,000 pages, most notably on all CP screenshots (of which there are over 5,600 you obsessive people).

What makes it awesome is there is no need to edit it. There are three parameters. The first is the image, you can choose one of about 9 or add you own as you normally would. Parameter two is the text. Examples:

The optional third parameter is the class. This parameter is hugely powerful option that loads all the templates style parameters. Several are already set up in the common.css, you can add them on indefinitely. This has a huge number of advantages

1. Savings on the server load, as when you edit the style of a template in the common.css it will not get added to job queue. User will see the changes as they update their style sheets (you computer will do this, but you can force it by using ctrl-F5).
2. Consistency in the style of the wikis templates making us look more professional.
3. It looks like MediaWiki will be changing over the next few versions. This should hopefully keep us a head of the curve, especially if the old html tags are phased out.
4. If you are using an unusual set up, say those new widescreen monitors I am to poor to afford, you can customise the appearance using your own monobook.css

Basically do the mob like this new template system? Keep in mind all it actually is a box with a picture on the left, with text to the right of it, everything else is customisable in the common.css. - π 07:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Hell yes. Forward Nx a drink from me for the hard work! I really like the water mark, it's subtle features like that that makes me think "21st Century Internet" rather than the fairly bland and plain feel you get from websites that just seem just short of a decade behind the times. ^sshole 10:32, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Looks great to me. The water mark is a lovely touch. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 10:51, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay here a few examples:

This project page has been nominated for deletion. The reason given is "it lacks goat". Please discuss this assassination attempt on the talk page.

This page is dead, but is being retained as an archive. Please do not edit it! This page has either outlived its usefulness, or, through neglect and/or disinterest, become unused. If you wish to reinvigorate it, bring it up on the talk page.

As a confirmed mustard jar for taking on this job as a Sysop on RationalWiki: I pledge to only block users if they ask for it, or insert unfunny vandalism. I furthermore pledge that if I indulge in secret private conversations about you, we will make a formal report to the mob. Is that all? If you impugn my motives without warrant, or challenge my "AUTHORATIE", er, there is nothing I can or will do.

Any opinions when you see them in action? - π 10:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't fully understand the technical issues but they look good to me with the exception of the watermark on the white/blank one. It makes me want to clean my monitor.--Bob^{Not Jim} 12:05, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

The delete or sysop template? - π 12:10, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

The sysop template. But I don't think it's a big issue. I like the idea.--Bob^{Not Jim} 12:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

We can colour it for you. - π 12:39, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

The challenge will be for new templates for new editors. If you don't know there's a system but you are wiki-savvy, it will lead to confusion. Not a huge hurdle per se, but it can be expected. Sterile bazooka 13:30, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't think there's much of an issue there. 90% of anyone making a template will just copy one that already exists as it's just easier that way (even if you are wiki-savvy, in fact, probably more so if you're wiki-savvy). I think people will notice how to use the message boxes and the documentation explains it well enough. ^sshole 14:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll add all the classes to the doc as well. It is three parameters, how can we go wrong? *sits back and waits for the inevitable melt down of the server*. 22:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

PS They are pretty. Sterile bazooka 18:33, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

You sure do got a purdy template thar DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 19:45, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I was so impressed with Nx for this. - π 01:30, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

While this is very interesting and perhaps prettier, I am struck by how differently this was handled than most issues on this site. A template is created, and by the time "input" is requested, it "cannot be edited"? Contrast that with the recent long discussion and feedback over changing the logo. A moment ago I saw a template that did not "obey the new rules" when I edited a page without being logged in. What happens now if someone wants to "support" their new template the easy way, by adding its image and formatting (ie, border style) to the template? Who decided what images and styles would be supported? The current crop are fairly narrow to choose from, I only see a couple of border colors. What if someone wants to make one with a solid green border? Where, indeed, was any discussion on this issue before it was implemented - and implemented in a way that any sysop can now grind the site down to a standstill? In absentia 03:44, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

While I agree that there should have been discussion before implementing these, I am struck by how rude some of the reactions were. I would have been pretty upset if someone threw out my work with comments like "smearing bad formatting all over the site" and "wrecking all the boxes on the site" Pathetic transparent sock 11:59, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Reverting an edit isn't really "throwing out work". Those comments were made after two days of simple questions not being answered, in frustration. While I agree quite a few near the end were quite out of line, so is embarking on a major project affecting the look and feel of the site not only without preliminary discussion, but also not discussing it when asked - and, in fact, rudely turning down simple requests regarding the formatting. In absentia 20:56, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

More colours and styles can be added it just takes a bit of CSS know how rather than the old html tags, Human. The reason it can't be edit is because it is being used of the new Template:CP screenshot of which there are 5,600 inclusions. - π 05:29, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Are there clear instructions on how to do that somewhere? In absentia 20:56, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

I repeat my ignored question. I'm trying to make a template fit the new fascist RW mold, but I don't know how to do it. ħuman 03:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

We'll get there. I am busy with other stuff at the moment, I'll right some instructions as soon as I feasibly can. - π 03:22, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

While, in principle, I like the new messagebox system, I do feel that we are losing some identity. I recently tried to edit without logging in and got a bland warning icon. Previously we had the 'ceiling cat' and despite being slightly averse to the preponderance of felines on RW, I felt that this added some humour to an otherwise dry yet important issue. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 09:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

You can revert it. It is just I edit from IP at uni sometimes and have always hated it so I took the opportunity to change it. - π 09:40, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't want to do anything unilaterally but perhaps we could incorporate some of the whimsy into the new system? It doesn't even have to be the same picture, maybe we could ask Karajou to come up with something. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member}

Getting our house in order - the logarithm in our own eye (sticky)

One of the things we criticise CP for regularly is its violation of copy-right with regards to images. Sometime later this week I am going to run a bot across all the image files to find the ones that are incorrectly documented and place them in a category saying that they have no licensing template. To that ends, does anyone know of a licensing template that is not on this list or the Template:Fair use? I am also going to create two new ones, one for work that you upload that is your own private copy-right which you are licensing only for use of RW and those you have gained permission from the copy-right holder for the use only on RW; I will add these to the drop down menu on the upload screen.

BTW, I have noticed a new template saying we don't know the copyright of images and we don't care - that is not really expectable. The onus is on the uploader to check the copy-right status, before they use the picture. - π 01:15, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"we don't care" Check the edit history on that one. In absentia 01:19, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay that was just template unknown before it was fixed. - π 01:23, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I have now made Template:Rw-licence‎‎. I might add an optional name parameter to it though. - π 01:55, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

The RW-licence is pretty useful. Might give me the incentive to start making more illustrations. ^sshole 09:22, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay done - I hope

Alright I have finished running my bot. There is a Template:Nolicence that indicates that the images does not have licensing template on it. If you want to check out what you have uploaded that does not have a licence on it put:

<dpl> 
createdby = Yourname
namespace = File
uses = Template:Nolicence 
</dpl>

in your sandbox. - π 11:08, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I am going to run the bot again over the less than 30KB images as it seems to have missed a few. I will be doing it in very small chunks, probably after backup has run this evening. - π 01:46, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Common images

There are a few images marked with the no-licence template (like this one) that are so common that finding the copyright notice for them would be next to impossible. While "it's found all over the internet" of course isn't an excuse for copyright violation, could we possibly use a different template for these.

This image does not have have an image copyright notice. However, its prevalence on the internet may mean that tracking down copyright information is impractical or even impossible. If you are the copyright holder of this image and do not agree to its use on Rational Wiki, please see our copyright violations policy. This image was uploaded:

Or something like that. It's obviously not perfect, but it recognises the practicalities of the situation as being far more difficult. Defining "prevalence" objectively and clearly will be difficult, however. ^sshole 15:31, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

That does seem like a good idea. Do we have an name for that template? - π 23:06, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Not that I can thinking of. Although I think "poor excuse" would be a decent name for it. ^sshole 12:53, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Non-commercial

I think we need a copy-right notice for people that have allowed non-commercial use of their images. - π 01:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Template:Non-commercial I just create on then. - π 01:29, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Autocratic move

I've changed the upload image link in the toolbox so that it preloads Template:Information, because you are too lazy to use it. Bitch here if you think this is a bad idea. -- Nx / talk 01:24, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Good idea actually. If we're going to host dozens of images, they need sorted. There's so many that are duplicated or only get used on one userpage when they're taking up quite a bit of space, or could be used elsewhere. ^sshole 16:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Quick, but silly, question: what would happen with the bot that puts the image copyright notice on the images if they were contained within the template? I assume it'd read the code and see it fine, but would it overwrite something or mess up in any way? ^sshole 16:27, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't know, you'll have to ask Pi. My guess is it will add the nolicense template to the bottom of the image description page, and if there's already a copyright notice on the page it won't add anything. -- Nx / talk 16:47, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

National Geographic

PalMD might get into print now that ScienceBlogs & NG have teamed up. just the one link: it's all over, over there ^{I am eating} _& honey^chat

The big times at last! CЯacke®

So I'm stuck at home...

...with mono and I'm bored out of my mind! Anyone have fun stuff to do on the net? Games are cool, as are good humour sites, good tv shows etc. Many thanks RyanC

I think we have an article that might help. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 03:44, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Public. Library. 04:17, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Build a phase shifter to make "fake" stereo? ħuman 05:00, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

There's always this great standby in times of boredom. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 10:46, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Mono sucks. Convert to stereo, or preferably Dolby 5.1 and you'll be having a much better time. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 21:45, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually mono can be very impressive if well-produced - you can actually get width, height, depth from one speaker playing good program material. That said, there's probably only six recordings that fit that description. And 5.1 is so 2002, nowadays you've got nothing unless you've got 9.3.2 ħuman 22:43, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Good TV series lively to be found on DVD: Deadwood and Mad Men. Deadwood is particularly engrossing, you cocksuckers. ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 16:08, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

If you've not visited before, then Lileks can kill an awful lot of time. Worm^{(t | c)} 16:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Whew, that's a relief

I saw the Ray Comfort birthday greetings and was afraid he and I shared a birthday.

Fortunately, his is the day after mine, and I can share mine with Pappy Boyington, Wink Martindale, Max "Jethro" Baer, Jr., Dennis Wilson, and, less appealingly, Gary Gilmore. MDB 13:22, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

You're lucky. The only vaguely (in)famous name I can find (or that I actually recognise) that shares my birthday is Joseph Mengele. Go figure. Oh and Erik Estrada. Oh yay! --PsygremlinParlez! 13:50, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Joan of Arc, Jakob Bernoulli and Sun Myung Moon. Possibly others. Professor Moriarty 14:28, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Mine is tax day in the US. Births include Leonardo da Vinci, Kim Jong-Il's dad, and Catherine the Great's mum. --Kels 16:21, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Marcus Aurelius, William Shakespeare, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Rudolf Hess, Charles Richter, David Coleman, Koo Stark, Roger Taylor, and lonelygirl15. are the most famous ones on my birthday. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 16:28, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I was born on my own birthday. How's that for a coincidence. --⁠ 16:29, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Nothing interesting on mind. Well, that singer died on it. Who was it again? Jackson? Mick. Oh yeah, Micheal Jackson, that's it. It'll be an interesting time next year, I'll want to get pissed and everyone else on the planet will want to mourn someone who - until his death - they all thought was a child molester. Fucking great. ^sshole 16:30, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

My friend at uni was born on christmas day, I mean the odds of that are like a million to one. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 21:47, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Tom Waits, IIRC. ħuman 22:45, 5 December 2009 (UTC) Yup, and Noam Chomsky. And Larry Bird and Johnny Bench, and some woman whose only available photo lacks garmentation.

I have one of the neater birthdays. William Shockley, Jerry Springer, Kelly Hu Chuck Yeager and Mina Suvari. One day, my name will be on the list of notables, as well. -- CodyH (talk) 14:07, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Prehistoric nuclear war

Interesting. Anyone know much about nukes etc. to debunk (or possibly even confirm!) that this sort of thing is possible? It's a nice, romantic idea that we're not the first intelligence on the planet and that a previous one tore itself to pieces, but the timescale needed for deep-time to erradicate all evidence that a massive civilisation existed numbers in the hundreds of millions of years, if not billions based on the oldest unchurged rocks that exist on the surface. There just doesn't seem like there's enough time for evolution to a sentient species to happen twice given that. ^sshole 16:25, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I think there'd be evidence in the radioisotope ratios. Kind of like how we wrecked carbon dating with our nuclear tests. Also, he seems to think it wasn't "very" prehistoric, though I don't think he risks picking a date. I only Schlafly-skimmed the tripe, though, so he may be correct.fnord ħuman 22:54, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

That's what I was thinking. But the imbalance in radio-isotopes probably wouldn't be detected after millions upon millions of years because they'd either decay, or the non-transuranic ones would be mixed up by the rock cycle and produce something that looked natural. So it's almost plausible that it could happen and we wouldn't detect it - albeit if you smacked the earth with a hundred nukes half a billion years ago or so. But, the majority of "ancient nuclear war" ideas seem to be much more recent, to the point where time just couldn't hide it and we'd notice. So it seems like a woo-tastic explanation for some archaeological anomalies and some mythology. You're right that he's very sloppy with the dates, there's not a single date mentioned; you'd expect a nuclear war to happen more or less at the same time (that gives more chance for records of it to be destroyed and for it to go unnoticed by history) but the things the guy mentions seem to be scatted across a lot of history. ^sshole 19:19, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Michael Moore's The Awful Truth

Anyone else think that Michael Moore has a tendency to accidently accidently make the wrong point? The first episode of this show being a perfect example: If you can publically shame healthcare companies into changing their policies, why do we need the government to do it.--Mustex 19:19, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Haven't seen the show, but the answer would be, I guess, if we really can do it across the board, there's no need, correct. However, part of what can make "public shaming" work is the potential or looming threat of government action (like the big etailers with bricks'n'mortar stores deciding to pay local sales taxes). ħuman 23:06, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Part, yeah, but not all. I think there's also the risk of people changing to another company if yours becomes more notorious than the others for refusing to provide treatments. The example was a man who had two conflicting clauses in his contract with Humana. They said they'd cover all treatments related to his diabetes, but that they wouldn't cover organ transplants. When he needed a new pancreas for his diabetes, they refused to pay for it. First Moore and the man came to their office, under the pretense of a meeting to look over the claim, but actually to give the executives an "invitation" to the man's funeral (printed invitations reading Date: Very Soon, Time: Is Running Out), and to ask for advise picking out coffins. When that didn't work, they held a mock-funeral for the man in front of Humana's office building, and Moore made it clear that, while most episodes of his show deal with different issues, if they refused to pay he'd do a follow up every week for the rest of the season (this was the first episode). Within a week they paid up, they then decided to change their policy and cover all pancreas transplants.--Mustex (talk) 04:40, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for details. One company, one procedure. Great for people who have a health insurance company and Michael Moore on the spot. For the rest of us? Give me single-payer National Health Care before the capitalists make death a "profit sector". Or did they already? ħuman 04:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually, not just one procedure. The risk for scandal caused them to change their policy to cover all pancreas transplants. Granted, that doesn't help the uninsured, but the episode wasn't about the uninsured.--Mustex (talk) 12:58, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Almost all of RC is logs

Is this some sort of record? Professor Moriarty 20:55, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Probably, considering we had MC to deal with and then Crooked Penis shows up to make things worse. Lord of the Goons ^{The official spikey-haired skeptical punk} 20:55, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Am i the only one who thinks they are one in the same? Ace^{of Spades} 20:57, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey, guyz, just got back from the library. What the fuck? I mean, what the fucking fuck? TheoryOfPractice 20:58, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

ĴάΛäšςǍ₰ I like exotic igloos 20:58, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

MC decided to reveal that he wasn't a childish fuckhead by being a childish fuckhead. Nothing really unexpected. --Kels 20:59, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey ToP, whats up man! You missed some fun! Ace^{of Spades} 21:01, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah ToP you missed MC's hissy fit. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:02, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Didn't MC confess to trolling once before? Broccoli 21:03, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Stupid library. Stupid book-learnin'. Will go read recent changes. Stupid MC. TheoryOfPractice 21:05, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I would start way, way down, from when MC makes a section on his talk page called "Burnout". Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:06, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Wait, what did I miss? I tried to post something last night and the site locked up, so I just came back now and all hell broke loose again? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 21:51, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

You missed MC have a meltdown and start a block war, then start deleting pages when the block war he started wasn't enough. The Goonie Punk ^{Can't sleep, clowns will eat me!} 21:53, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

That reminds me: was Human here for all these shenanigans? Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:55, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

No, Human was MIA. The Spikey Punk ^{I'm punking my punk!} 21:57, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Too bad, he would finally have gotten to see MC's true colors. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 22:00, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I know. It was all fun and games until he actually started trashing the wiki. Then we (especially Ace and I) decided he could get fucked and vandal binned him. Punky ^{Your mental puke relief} 22:02, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

TBH I'm surprised you lot put up with that cunt for so long. How much of a moron do you actually have to be before the bouncers should throw you out? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 22:03, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Th thing of it is, we'd vandal bin him, and then he'd go "I'm not a vandal, look at my logs" and then some drunken sysop would go "He's right, he's not a vandal" and let him out. But, this morning CDT, he actually did finally start vandalizing the wiki, giving us the ammo we needed to purge his ass for good. Gooniepunk2010 ^{Oi! Oi! Oi!} 22:05, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

He'll be back, no question. He has nothing else and he needs his superiority fix. Ace^{of Spades} 22:07, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

True, but now he's vandal binned, and I will fight tooth and nail to keep him there for good. The Spikey Punk ^{I'm punking my punk!} 22:09, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I was pretty interested in his essays I gotta say. I wanted a whole one dedicted to me. Ace^{of Spades} 22:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, I hate to say I told you so. But, I told you so. Next time we get a disruptive arsehole chewing up time and bandwidth around here, can we please, please just get the fuck rid of him sooner rather than later? --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 22:34, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

If I had a nickel for every time I said that... --Kels (talk) 22:44, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

He was vandal binned because he vandalized RW, not because he admitted to being a troll. -- Nx / talk 22:54, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

And you don't see that as a flaw in the process? Or to put it another way, we want avowed and persistent trolls here because...? MC wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes at wikipedia. Our stupid policy prevented us from effectively dealing with someone who was obviously up to no good, and he knew it and exploited it to the hilt. It's time to change the policy, and not cling to a point of principle that really isn't terribly important. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 23:02, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

No. -- Nx / talk 23:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

"MC wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes at wikipedia." Indeed. Neither would most talk page threads at RW. -- Nx / talk 23:13, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Trolls make a valuable contribution to RW. We just haven't figured out what that is. --Kels (talk) 23:14, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I despair. Even after having your nose rubbed in the fact that there are people out there who are pricks, and will always be pricks no matter how many chances you give them to reform, you're still blindly refusing to acknowledge that, in general, it would be best if such pricks were elsewhere. Every other damn community site on the internet knows this, and has a process for implementing it. The thing is to pick a good process and stick to it. Having no such process, and refusing even to consider one, is just rubber stamping their licenses to troll. I guess I'll just continue my policy of being generally elsewhere too. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 23:24, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

We already have a process, we just need to enforce it better. MC should've been binned for violating RW:CS#Conduct, and we shouldn't have let any random drunken sysop unbin him whenever they felt like giving him another chance. -- Nx / talk 00:34, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I, for one, would argue that I think this wiki has, hopefully now, learned its lesson. AnarchoGoon ^{Swatting Assflys is how I earn my living} 23:27, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

(undent) After TK, I hoped the same thing. And others in the meantime. No, the wiki will not learn its lesson, and continue the "soft on trolls" policy. Oh, and MC will at some point be Sysop again, under that name. Remember, I called it. --Kels (talk) 23:29, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

One things for certain: if he is ever unbinned, let alone sysopped, again, it'll be after I leave and never come back. I promise you that. Gooniepunk2010 ^{Oi! Oi! Oi!} 23:37, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

If he actually contributes to the site (unlikely, I know), he can get out of the bin. Otherwise I agree that he got too many "one last chances". -- Nx / talk 00:34, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I have taken the final step and banned him. A self-admitted troll by definition cannot contribute positivley- why give him more opportunities to troll. Please do not unban him. --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 01:21, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Banning is pointless, and philosophically not desirable. I vote vandal-bin until substantial evidence of positive contributions is forthcoming. That's what the vandal bin is there for. To make vandalizing, trolling and being disruptive less fun.-- Antifly ^{Merged with Infinity} 02:56, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I concur. If MC just writes his little essays and comments on talk pages that would be ok by me. As long as he is not blanking pages. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 02:57, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

That may be accomplished by not making him a sysop again. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 08:24, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I may be a twisted shell of a human being, but I like having MC around. He's pretty entertaining. Of course, that tolerance doesn't extend to him damaging the wiki, but scrolling past one of the pools of bile that he's left on some talk page makes me laugh every time. Please don't ban him. Fedhaji (Talk) 10:19, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

LOL!!!! Please ban me! Let little dicks like Theemperor decide the ideological basis of this website! I got such a laugh from this page alone, honestly, Jeeves cracks me up every time. If RW is meant to be serious, banning me is perfectly acceptable and thus justified. But it is quite literally not serious, as you all admit. If RW is not serious, then banning me shows that none of you are capable of understanding that having me around is a credit to your system. A system which tolerates trolls (And a troll who points out the truth is infinitely more damaging than a troll who lies) is good system. Don't be nob-ends and break your principles over one person. MarcusCicero (talk) 11:32, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

And just like that he's a troll again. Professor Moriarty 13:10, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

As regarding the 'trolling with truth' thing, I am not alone in believing this: Him being an asshole doesn't excuse you being assholes too, or violating the community standards, or inventing a new rule that goes against the principles of this place. All he does is troll talk pages and "improve" articles by removing stuff he doesn't like. For the latter we have the vandal bin if it gets out of hand. As for the former, ignore him. Or does it hurt so much because what he says is true? -- Nx / talk 23:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Assholes. MarcusCicero (talk) 13:32, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Something a little bit different

Here's my two cents: I think that the intellectual content of what MC is saying is irrelevant. I consider him a troll and a nuisance not because of his message, but because of his means. No other editor has ever been allowed to get away with so many insulting remarks towards other editors. Regardless of his contributions to articles and/or discussions, the problem is that he treats the rest of us like shit. Though I am in favor of having dissenting views, there is no reason why we should have to put up with personal insults every half hour. That said, I think we should give MC another chance to clean up his act. If can be more civil, he can preach the message of his reform society all he likes. However, though I am willing to forgive MC, I do not believe he should be given sysopship again (at least for a while), since he clearly abused it. (And I say this as one of the first people to support his campaign for sysop.) If he can control his temper, then let him stay. But he does need to lay off the ad homs, which are, I think, the underlying issue here. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 16:12, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I should also add that my series of essays will continue. Being in the vandal bin makes it awkward, but the hypocrisy is still there. It'll be interesting to see if natural autocrats like theemperor will be capable of tolerating dissent for much longer. Also, the next theme of my series of essays will be on authoritarianism - wiki style. The subsequent essay titles are in the process of inspiration but revolve around the following themes; 'expulsion and decline', 'The TK argument', 'Delusional superiority' and 'MC- an internal justification'.^{— Unsigned, by: MarcusCicero / talk / contribs}

Not sure why you're bothering, seeing as you already told people not to take you seriously. Not that they were in the first place, but nobody's pretending any more. --Kels (talk) 18:16, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

OOH, I wonder who the third one will be about! --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 18:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

So he's still here. What happened to "I am a concern troll" "Adios RW!" I wonder?--Bob^{Not Jim} 18:18, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't as grand as he had expected. He found himself missing the attention in its wake. He'll give it another try, and maybe in a month he'll be all, "Even though I told you I was a troll, you still got trolled by my awesome essays!" And then he'll vandalize some more because someone was kindhearted enough to take him from the bin. This is not an original schtick he's been following.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 18:23, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Tetronian, did you forget that he went through and massively vandalized in an unfunny way, deleting numerous articles' content until someone stopped him? No one gives a shit about his personal insults, since he's not terribly insightful or clever and they're pretty clearly designed to capitalize on an already-obvious difference in attitude amongst a few of us. It's the vandalism we had to revert. He stays in the bin, because he is a massive vandal who has done it before and will just do it again.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 18:29, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

@Tom: No I didn't forget. But that's why we should parole/bin him rather than perma-ban him. My point is that I am willing to give him a second chance, but obviously if he continues vandalizing he should be banned for longer periods of time. And my point about insults is that he is being deliberately disruptive, which he needs to stop doing if he is to win any forgiveness from me. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 18:55, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

"My point is that I am willing to give him a 4,000th chance" - Fixed that for you. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 19:11, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, besides yesterday's deleting pages he has made no serious offenses that I can remember. He has merely acted like a piece of shit to virtually everyone, which is a different issue, I think. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 19:15, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Jesus fucking christ almighty. Why do we keep having this same fucking conversation for fucks sake. he can stay in the fucking bin, post his little essays if it makes him feel better, we'll all laugh and that'll be that. Fucking hell, what the fuck is wrong with you people? Ace^{of Spades} 19:18, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I can't argue with such an eloquently stated point: keep him in the bin, and let him eat cake! He can still write his essays and all. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 19:21, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Given that he's come out not as troll, but as a Concern troll then I think we should know how much weight to give his essays.--Bob^{Not Jim} 22:37, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Damn straight. In the bin and he can spin his wheels. Policy. --Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 23:10, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Aaaaaand cue Human with the predictable. Presumably responding to the massive support taking him out of the bin for any reason that we see here. --Kels (talk) 05:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh dear. How many times. How many times can one person be stupid enough to fall for the "please don't throw me in the briar patch, br'er fox" act. All MC's pleading to be blocked is a stratagem designed to keep him unblocked so he can troll, nothing more. He's playing us, and we don't seem to be able to muster the will to fix the problem. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 11:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Leave him in the bin forever and never ever give him sysop again. He'll get bored eventually (when he grows some pubes and his voice breaks). Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 13:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I really shouldn't drink whiskey while browsing the links from MSN Messenger's startup screen...

A couple of the gems which have just given me, intermittently, my best lulz and my worst throw-up-in-the-mouth moments of the week:

10 Totally Ridiculous Combo Gadgets: Think combo taser/MP3 player...

20 Worst Restaurant Foods in America: What kind of sick fuck invents a dish with over 3000 calories and triple-digit saturated fat?

Junggai (talk) 23:21, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, whiskey is just one of those things. I, regrettably, outed a genius sock of mine the last time I chugged a ton of whiskey. AnarchoGoon ^{Swatting Assflys is how I earn my living} 23:23, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I only got to "18. Worst Sit-Down Appetizer" before I encountered the first dish obviously meant to be shared... ħuman 00:35, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

My forehead-slapping moment was the over-1000-calorie kid's meal. Junggai (talk) 21:16, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Trivia

The word subaltern does not appear a single time on this wiki. 23:52, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

As well it should not. It is an evil, vicious word that should not be used in good company. --Kels (talk) 00:05, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Nobody should read those Marxist Post-Colonial philosophers. Bad company. 00:13, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

In fact the word "subaltern" appears twice on this wiki. Coincidently, both times in this section.--Bob^{Not Jim} 17:55, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

As does the phrase "Marxist Post-Colonial philosophers". Why are we discussing this? Man am I bored today. Need some... what do you call it... the stuff you eat when you are hungry. But I'm too tired to get up. Where is everybody? Marxist Post-Punk... whatever. --⁠ (talk) 18:02, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I guess than now that MC has come out as a troll that everybody has lost interest in the wiki.--Bob^{Not Jim} 18:12, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Nutty is absolutely correct. The word subaltern does not appear a single time - it now appears three times. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 17:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Two Books

How to Win a Fight with a Liberal and How to Win a Fight with a Conservative. Apologies for the links to a multinational conglomerate, but I thought y'all'd be interested. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 17:49, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I've seen those. I truly hate stuff like that, as it encourages a rift in American politics and public life that is making our country worse every day. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 18:57, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

From what I remember of the web sites for the two books, they're largely photocopies of each other, with "liberal" and "conservative" swapped as appropriate. Note that the same author wrote both books. MDB (talk) 13:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

This is my hate speech against the British.

What the hell? We fought a war against you for freedom and liberty, but you won't let us be! We had to force you to stop enslaving the people of Africa, and then rescued you during World War 2 and the Korean War and the War of Scottish Aggression, but you gotta keep dogging us with this "rationalism" stuff. Hey, it's not a "lorry," it's a truck! Get back in the "lift" to your "flat" and go eat some "bangers and mash." That doesn't sound like food! And the stuff in pub windows doesn't look like food! And what the hell are you doing with a monarchy? And why won't you give brave and noble Canada her freedom? Doesn't Canada deserve independence too!?--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 18:40, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Before reading any of that, fuck you. Now I'm going to read it. SJ ^Debaser 18:42, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

OK, I've now read it and I remain none the wiser. Fuck you!! SJ ^Debaser 18:43, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

They persecute at every turn! Witness: User talk:SuperJosh/Box of sand‎; 18:40 . . (+152) . . Moriarty (Talk | contribs | block) (Created page with 'As far as I can tell, "sandbox" is an American term. Over here I've always heard it called a sandpit. When will the tyranny of King George (or whoever it is now) end?! --Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 18:47, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually that does make a lot of sense... Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 18:49, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, to be fair, there's logic in both names. It realy depends on the design. Professor Moriarty 18:53, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Don't be reasonable! Stop being reasonable, villain!--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 18:54, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Treachery! Benedict Arnold and TK rolled into one!--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 18:50, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Hang on... I didn't really study history, but didn't the UK end slavery before the US (or whatever it was back then)? Professor Moriarty 18:56, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

A British lie designed to make us look bad! Lord Somerset, from Alabama, decided that the air of America was too pure for slave lungs, and freed them all with the help of Abraham Lincoln and George Washington at the Wannsee Conference.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 18:58, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

^{[citation needed]} Professor Moriarty 19:03, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

(EX, u/d)Heh hehe hehe heh... A friend of mine (a very occasional RW editor) once came across someone in a forum who tried the "we saved your ass in WWII" thing and bitchslapped him with a history lesson regarding the Eastern Front from 1941 onwards. Because apart from nuking Japan (and I always find it hilariously ironic that the one country in the world who has used these things in anger feels qualified to say who can and who can't have nukes) the US contribution to WWII was major, but very secondary to that of Russia (maybe even ranked behind China in some respects). But the rest, you can have. ^sshole 19:00, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

In defense of Truman, the bomb was used to save lives (American ones, at least), not in anger. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 19:03, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Nonsense! When Winston Churchill came back talking about "peace in our time," it was a very brave Roosevelt who told him what the real score was! And when Teddy Roosevelt did that, was your nation grateful? No! They just were too busy trying to kill Mother Theresa as she led India to independence!--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 19:04, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Surely that was Chamberlain. Churchill was more "war in our time". Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 20:31, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Good Lord, man, I'm not serious about any of this! The USA didn't help Britain in the Korean War, and there was no War of Scottish Aggression, and Britain freed her slaves way before the USA with the Somerset decision, and Lord Mansfield who made that decision was British and not American, and Abraham Lincoln and George Washington never knew each other, and the Wannsee Conference was where the Nazis determined upon the Final Solution and had nothing to do with America or slavery, and yes it was Chamberlain who said the above and not Churchill, and it wasn't Teddy Roosevelt in WW2 it was Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and Mother Theresa had nothing to do with Indian independence because it was Gandhi who did that.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 21:20, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Ahhhhhh, now he tells us. (just kidding) Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Wait, what was the war of Scottish aggression? Some joke I missed? Professor Moriarty 19:05, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

You should have paid attention in history. That was when the Scottish states in the north decided they didn't want England to secede as slave states, and so they fought to keep the British Union in one piece.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 19:07, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh, that one. Yeah, I only did up to the Early Modern Age. Funny I've never heard it mentioned before though, being a Scot and all that... Professor Moriarty 19:11, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

And lets not forget that in 1812 you Brits tried to take the US back by force. And yet, in spite of that, we still saved your arses from the commies! Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 19:13, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

What pissed Tom off enough to go on this racist rant in the first place? I think I missed something. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 19:15, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Sandboxes being called sandpits. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 19:16, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

No, it was because Prime Minister Bush led us into these terrible wars in Iraq and Afghanistan!--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 19:22, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

This War of 1812? ^sshole 19:54, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Yup that's the one! Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 19:59, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

You got your own back in New Orleans in January, mainly because Major General Sir Edward Pakenham was a total dick, but that's another matter. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 20:09, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Why hasn't anyone mentioned those ridiculous fake accents and the bad spelling habits? "centre?" Give me a break! No one thinks its cute anymore. Sort of like "shoppe." Also, who but a confirmed nation of perverts eats spotted dick for desert? You need to take that jenk to the doctor, yo. ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 16:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

As an aside, Kurt Busiek, the writer of the very excellent American comic book series Astro City once wanted to include a reference to an English supervillain named "Spotted Dick". His editors frowned upon that, so he renamed him "Clever Dick", and instructed the artist to portray him with spots on his face. Incidentally, this was not published by Marvel Comics, who, during the Seventies published, I swear to FSM, Giant Size Man-Thing. MDB (talk) 12:24, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Chemical warfare, chemical warfare, chemical warfare, warfare, warfare

I was out with my dad and brothers last night in the local pub, and after about 4/5 pints we started the usual horeshite talk of philosophy, politics, religion and war. It was quite interesting to see a more liberal side to my old man on the whole issue of war and such. While I'd say he's an economic conservative, he was very anti-war, saying both Iraq and Afghanistan were pointless, how Obama's promise of the West being out of the Middle East by 2011 is bollocks, and how religion fucks everything up by causing war. I've never talked extensively with him about politics and it was just interesting how things like this crop up.

As you were. SJ ^Debaser 20:21, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I normally end up playing Daily Mail nutter trumps with my dad. He'll go on about the evil Jews, and Hitler getting a few things right, and there's no point in being rational about it, since I know it's in one ear and out the other. The approach I found is to become more extreme than anything he's saying, i.e. he says that the Jews should be killed, so I'll start describing in graphic detail how the children should be dealt with. It normally snaps him back in to reality for a short while, but before long we're back in to Daily Mail land. The joy. --^{Ask me about your mother} 20:32, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

The Daily Mail just makes me sick in general, along with the Daily Express. They're the typical right-wing commentators who go on about how the country is going to shit, how the rest of the world includes foreigners, and as such terrorists, and how we're running out of oil. They're the typical right-wing commentators who would have no fucking clue what to do if they got into power. SJ ^Debaser 23:22, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Yup, the newspapers of choice for armchair brownshirts. When he's visiting I normally end up browsing a copy or two of the Mail, and I wonder how anyone could possibly read that without shooting themselves dead over breakfast.--^{Ask me about your mother} 09:01, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Mmmmm....

The smell of baking bread has to be one of the most pleasant aromas in human experience. MDB (talk) 22:51, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

You know what else is? FAART! Apologies all, I know you hate it when I do this, but I couldn't resist...

Ah, sorry, I farted. This page has been gas attacked by SuperJosh. Sorry.

SJ ^Debaser 23:59, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Dammit Josh, don't ruin MDB's baking! There are few things better than freshly baked bread and pastries. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 01:42, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

It's a difficult choice but if I had to decide between freshly baked bread, roasting coffee beans and new mown hay... nah, can't do it. Bob Soles (talk) 11:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

New mown hay? Ah... ah... ah.... CHOO! Lousy allergies... MDB (talk) 13:10, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Fun day today

So I went to visit my friend in the hospital (I still feel bad about cracking his rib while we were playing American Soccer), and I am sitting chatting to him and cracking (ha ha) jokes. The other guy is hooked up to a bunch of machines, and my friend mentioned that he was shot and can't feel anything below his navel, and can never walk again. As I am getting ready to leave, a woman comes in with a bible (you can guess where this is going) and chastises him for not being faithful enough to walk again. *sigh* ĴαʊΆʃÇä₰ thinking of what to say next 00:47, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't know whether to go cry or throw something through a window. There are few things I hate more than people who impose and apply their narrow viewpoint onto everyone else. Fuck them. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 01:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Maybe it was a tactic on her behalf to piss him off so much he'd regain the use of his legs just to jump out of bed and kick her in the head for being a bitch. SJ ^Debaser 01:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually, now that I've calmed down a bit, this issue merits consideration. What exactly is it that is so goddamn aggravating about it? I suppose its just the fact that the woman is blaming the poor guy and insinuating that the world is a fair, just, and perfect place under God when it is obviously not. But that can't be the only thing about it. It's odd, Javascap's story angers me so much and I can't even figure out why. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 01:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Question

So what's the average age of editors here? I keep reading the Conservapedia talk voting thing.

Y'know. Just wondering. :3 Pedobear (talk) 02:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

50, in a few hours. ħuman 02:37, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Really? HAPPY BIRTHDAY HUW!! Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 02:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you :) ħuman 04:10, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

See, the place is full of kids. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 06:49, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Javasca₧ hi there! 06:59, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

28 - 32....moving forward one in a few tens of hours. Ace^{of Spades} 07:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy birthday Human, you old tempestuous dog you. As for me, I'm only a few years behind you. DogP^{Marmite Patrol} 07:05, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Wow, you're 50? No wonder you didn't know "Pedobear." Happy birthday! You're only a bit too young to be twice as old as me.--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 07:07, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy B.Day Huw....your present is in the post. 100% pure Ace...Ace^{of Spades} 07:11, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

31 on Wednesday. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 11:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Mid-30s. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?} 11:59, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I just turned 43 last Friday. Since I am undoubtedly middle-aged, I am contemplating purchasing a motorcycle (sports cars do nothing for me) and dumping my partner of ten years for a trophy boy. (Okay, I'm not really contemplating dumping my partner. I have thought about buying a motorcycle, though.) MDB (talk) 14:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I think that the editors here fall into two basic groups, age-wise.

• Firstly there's the old fogeys. I'm one at 56, Huw, Susan, MDB, Ghengis, and a few others. We all, presumably, contribute from our place of employment. If only my boss knew what I did all day...
• Secondly there's the young whipper-snappers, mostly University students who really ought to be putting in the hours to get that starred first they know they're capable of.

Bob Soles (talk) 14:09, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy birthday, Human. 35 here. --^{Ask me about your mother} 14:10, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

And then I looked above to see two editors in their 30s completely blowing my theory out of the water. Someday I'll learn to look before I leap. Bob Soles (talk) 14:11, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

One more here (36). Happy birthday Human. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 14:13, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I am not an 'old fogey'. Old fogeys are the people older than me; young kids are the people younger than me. Just like the people driving faster than me are maniacs, and the people driving slower than me are morons. QED. MDB (talk)

Happy B-Day, Huw. Me? 42. The ultimate answer, and my age. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 16:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

45 but I could pass for 44. ^Me!Sheesh!_Mine! 16:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Whippersnappers, all of you, especially the ones in need of a sprotscar. I beam kindly upon you all from atop my grizzled eminence. When Huw first drew breath, I was a army brat in the middle east, whooping it up raising dust running around the vacant lots with the local sub-teen kids and my co-American buddies. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 16:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm 1X. I refuse to reveal X. Professor Moriarty 19:15, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I was very disappointed to turn 42, because I could no longer obscure my age by giving it in hexadecimal (since 42 is 2A in hex.) And to my fellow geeky smart-asses: you don't have to point out my age in octal or binary. MDB (talk) 19:46, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

God dammit you guys are so fucking old it creeps me out. ^{— Sincerely, Neveruse513 / Talk / Block} 19:49, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I think of myself as a 20 year old with 16 years' experience. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 19:52, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I may be chronologically old, but I've tried to remain mentally young. As I say before I get to see my six year old niece and her eighteen month old sister, "its nice to have playmates at my mental level." MDB (talk) 20:00, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

21 in March--Thanatos (talk) 20:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone who wished me a happy birthday. So, back to the question, overall, RW has hosted editors from 14 (1) and 16 (3?) to well into their dotage, and, it seems, everywhere in between. ħuman 21:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Don't mention it. There are few accomplishments more important than being shoved out of a birth canal. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 21:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Wow, I never thought anyone could truely hate the concept of peace

but I was wrong. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJY-fBXCncw&feature=video_response Fortunately thought, there's an effective response. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f70Si6REWj8 Ryantherebel (talk) 02:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Give punching that guy in the face a chance. --Kels (talk) 03:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Another problem solved by violence. Fedhaji (Talk) 10:55, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm with Kels. That was the kind of rant I would have gladly called a moratorium on peace for years ago when I still got in fights at taverns. 14:49, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's a sad fact that war has caused the fastest and most prolific increases in our technological capability, that I won't deny, but it's not an excuse. And that one that said "ooh, but what if the other guy wants war?" is EVEN WORSE! ^sshole 19:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Tuesday

Somehow I didn't put two and two together and realize that I'm getting a delicious double dose of crazy on Tuesday. Not only is Andy going to be on Colbert, but Sarah Palin is coming to do a book signing at Borders. Any suggestions about what I should drink afterwards or during? Yorick^Crass.

Hemlock and bourbon, neat or on the rocks. 08:11, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Fly-Agaric with a whisky chaser to make sure you have the right glint in your eyes. Ace^{of Spades} 09:05, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Brugmansia and BromodragonFLY, chased down with meths. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 11:20, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

You just lost The Game

Speaking of birthdays, the wife was going to buy me Assassin's Creed 2 for the SexBox, and I told her not to bother and I'd buy it when the price drops just before xmas. Do you think I'm talking shit and should just fork out the £36 for it now or should I be patient? Do they actually drop the price before xmas or keep it nice and high to fuck the parents with kids? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 15:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

You've got it backwards; they drop the prices right after christmas, not before, especially for a late release game. And, really, just pick it up, it's totally worth it. Z3ro^talk 15:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Hrmph. How much do you think it might drop to after xmas? Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 15:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

They usually drop £10 or so if you get 'em on Steam or something similar. Yahtzee quite likes AssCreed II but I'm not sure it's quite my cup of tea. I've been playing Dragon Age: Origins and that kicks ass. –SuspectedReplicant^{retire me} 16:13, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't know about you Brits, but games in the US usually drop about $10 after the holiday season, so there's not much difference. Z3ro^talk 16:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I hate it now that I have a SexBox that the games are all an extra ten quid, just coz of the console licensing. Shame I can't hog the Media Center PC in the lounge :( Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 16:54, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

FUCKER! I'd been going for over a year without losing! I had a great streak going in The Game, but not anymore! Goddamnit!--Tom Moore^{fiat justitia} 17:39, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah too bad Tom. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 19:21, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey everybody!

Look over here! SJ ^Debaser 17:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok, what are we sposed to be looking at? I've seen talk pages before, & a lot of them are more interesting than that one. Wěǎšěǐǒǐď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 20:21, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

First off it's VERY exciting, and secondly, I was addressing the "Sod's Law" issue. SJ ^Debaser 20:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

RW Awards

As the end of the year is coming 'round I thought it would be fun to create some RW awards like the CP ones. The page is here at RWW. It's a bit basic at the moment as I don't want to invest much time if people aren't interested. Please feel free to add categories and nominations.--False Flag (talk) 19:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah thank you for pointing it out. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 19:32, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Not at all. I just created it. In a spirit of fun I also added your nomination for the category "Biggest attention whore" for nominating yourself for something.

Ahahahahaha! Good, I hope I win. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 19:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I think we all know who's going to win that one hands down. Though I think with "attention whore" the joke should be that the award is never issued to them. There's the nominations, the voting and then it all gets deleted. (add "mwhahaha" or whatever, here) ^sshole 19:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Now that would be funny. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 19:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I should get an award for just putting up with you scumfilled zeros. Ace^{of Spades} 19:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Who you callin' scumfilled? Z3ro^talk 21:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

You love it really. ^sshole 19:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Considering the categories, perhaps I should be flattered I have (so far) remained unnominated. But then, for most of my life, I have qualified as "mostly harmless". MDB (talk) 19:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Ooo that should be an award! Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 19:59, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

If you feel in need of recognition of some type then I recommend that you add yourself to the "attention whore" category.--False Flag (talk) 21:10, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

As someone who has been here for well over 2 years (according to RWW, I can't keep track) I sort of feel like I should have some sort of recognition. However, having done my best to transcend the petty squabbles and drama that seem to be the hallmark of these nominations, the only category that seems tailored to me is Drunken Editing. Perhaps I should wear my drunkenness on my sleeve more (I'm thinking Fox now; maybe that's a bad idea). I'm only a very little drunk now. I'll be back in an hour. DickTurpis (talk) 01:11, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Ay, now there's the rub: Legitimate contributors such as yourself get ignored, while annoying pricks like myself get noticed. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 01:36, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I demand a lifetime achievement award in authoritarianism, right now. And maybe one for hubris. --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 01:51, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

"Legitimate contributor" may be quite the overstatement. Let's just say "slightly less insufferable prick than many."

Back to my eggnog.... DickTurpis (talk) 01:52, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, but who the hell could win "legitimate contributor"? ^sshole 16:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

The craziest thing just happened to me!

So I'm sitting at my house, minding my own business, when my house starts rattling and there is a really loud noise outside. (I should mention that I am on EST, meaning it is 10 at night, or 22:00.) So I look outside my window and there's a giant fucking helicopter hovering over my house with its searchlight on. It's going all around in circles shining a searchlight and hovering ominously, so I'm thinking, what the fuck is going on here?? So eventually I decide to call the cops and they tell me that there is a robbery fugitive on the loose and they are looking for him. So this damn thing flies all around my street for a good 20 minutes with this big bright searchlight pointing everywhere. Finally it leaves, but since no cop cars showed I assume they couldn't find the guy. Weird shit overall though. Very Big-Brotherish and all. And where the fuck did my suburban town get a helicopter anyway? Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 03:30, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Lock your fucking doors. Yikes! Aboriginal Noise ^{Theist, barely hanging by a nail} 03:33, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually that reminds me of a time I was at the local amusement park, and a fully armed Apache helicopter was hovering over the parking lot. What the hell was that about? Aboriginal Noise ^{Theist, barely hanging by a nail} 03:35, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Mimes, probably. Nasty little blighters. Once your theme park gets infested with mimes, a hellfire missile is the only cure. --JeevesMkII ^{The gentleman's gentleman at the other site} 06:49, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Living in the drug capital of Nottinghamshire, we get them at least once a week. They generally seem to be chasing idiots offroading on motorbikes where the fuzz on the ground can't follow. They do rattle the building when they get low.

An infestation of mimes calls for the most extreme measures wherever it happens. Try Edinburgh during the fringe: they're a plague. ^{I am eating} _& honey^chat 07:07, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Bloody hell, if I saw a police chopper buzzing around my house I'd probably microwave my hard drive. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 09:05, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Found this for my local fuzz chopper:

Sample activity log for Notts police helicopter

08/11/2009 Costhorpe Incident Investigation Containment of a building which was believed to have burglars inside. A search revealed no burglary had occurred. 08/11/2009 Manton Suspect Search Search of Manton Wood for a person who had allegedly committed a street robbery. No trace. 07/11/2009 Mansfield Suspect Search Report of a large number of young people causing a disturbance in a park. No person present on arrival. 07/11/2009 Mansfield Suspect Search Search for persons causing disorder at Oak Tree Lane Tesco.Large group dispersed on arrival.One detained. 07/11/2009 Hucknall Search for vehicle Search for a vehicle involved in a robbery. Area searched, no trace. 07/11/2009 Clipstone Suspect Search Search for burglars at Centre Parcs. Area searched, no trace. 07/11/2009 Broxtowe Suspect Search Search for suspects from a stolen car. Area searched, no trace. 06/11/2009 Forest Town Incident Investigation Containment of an address reported to have burglars inside. Mistaken report from the public, no burglary took place. 06/11/2009 Low Marnham Incident Investigation Search for suspected burglars, one person detained by officers on the ground. 06/11/2009 Sherwood Suspect Search Search of gardens for a burglary suspect who had made off from the police. Not located. 06/11/2009 Hucknall Suspect Search Search for poachers with firearms. Area searched, no trace. 06/11/2009 M1 Hucknall Incident Investigation Follow of a stolen vehicle, which was stopped and two people arrested. 06/11/2009 The Meadows Suspect Search Search for a man with a machete, located by officers, machete located using thermal image in grass. One arrested. 05/11/2009 Whatton Suspect Search Search for three men who had made off into fields following an aggravated burglary. Area searched, no trace. 05/11/2009 Eastwood Suspect Search Search for suspects who may be attempting to burgle a school. No trace. 04/11/2009 Top Valley Search for vehicle Search for a car that was lost following a pursuit. A stolen vehicle was located by ground units and recovered. 03/11/2009 Aspley Suspect Search Search for a suspect who had abandoned a vehicle. A house was contained until officers arrived. 1 person arrested.

^{I am eating} _& honey^chat 09:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

There's helicopters all over the shop in London. Most interesting thing that happened with me with choppers was that on 7/7/2005, London bomb attacks, a chopper had to land on my Sixth Form playing field to get supplies, because of the increased terrorist threat it wasn't safe for it to go to the nearest RAF base. SJ ^Debaser 11:52, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

You do seem to have been a bit sheltered if you get this excited over a helicopter! Or maybe it's because I'm from one of the less salubrious parts of Britain and police helicopters were a regular sight. (And I rely on helicopters to get home from work, so yes I like sitting on a big chopper) DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 12:51, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Well you see I live in a little suburb in New Jersey, where helicopters are basically non-existent. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 13:21, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Two or three house moves ago there was a ball field nearby that often got used for a life flight helipad. After a while we got used to lights and noises in the night. They looked a bit like, and sounded a lot like the speedy little numbers we called Cayuses in RVN, not the whopwhopwhop of a Huey. Don't even get me started on what a Sikorsky Skycrane will do to unsecured items on the ground, when it is working hard. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 15:29, 8 December 2009 (UTC)