User talk:TK

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

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>

• Archive #1
• Archive #2
• Archive #3
• Archive #4
• Archive #5
• Archive #6
• Archive #7
• User_talk:TK/vandalism

---

Conservapedia Discussion Group - Visit this group!

---

Archiving

Hi - I changed the old parameter in the Pibot archiving template for this site from 2 days to a more realistic 7 days: Otherwise it would seem that you are trying to automatically dodge questions like:

• So, what's not deceitful on oversighting this File:Talk-Global Positioning System - Conservapedia 1264634820907.png? FvC (talk) 01:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome -- larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 07:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey, jerkoff, I can dodge any questions I want. Where are your archives? As for your question above, I learned the oversighting trick from here. Fuck yourself. --TK_/MyTalk^{RW User #45} 09:01, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

• I don't doubt that you didn't invent the oversighting trick - the question stands: don't you think that you applied it in a deceitful way?
• I'm not as popular as you at this site, so the necessity to archive my talk-page hasn't occurred yet.
• Of course, you can dodge any question you want. It's my intention to show to everyone that you are doing so.

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:42, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Wow TK, language. Getting a bit hot under the collar when faced with the uncomfortable truth, are we? Or is it a side-effect of whatever drugs you take that keep you going on your 50-hour editing binges? However, you really should set the example - after all, you mention us so often over on CP that the little innocent home-schoolers are sure to follow you over here and I'd hate for your language to sear their retinas. --Psygremlin講話 09:47, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

TK - it's enough that you abuse archiving at CP - you won't abuse it here: The traffic on your talk page doesn't justify such a short time-span for active threads. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 21:43, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I was to harsh: TK, coming from CP you cannot know this, but archiving is a important task and should be done with common sense: no one - for instance - wants to interrupt an ongoing discussion or to prevent information from being seen by interested parties. As your visits here at RationalWiki are quite infrequent (looking at your edit history) you should at best refrain from using the Pibot - archiving function: you don't want to create a situation were you have to de-archive a thread to answer a question because it was posted here during a period of absence, and the eager bot had dragged it into the backroom. So, generally, human archiving is preferable to the botted version - whenever feasible. larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 22:02, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

You're a moron and a liar, LArron. Where is this archive rule posted? My page, since Pi suggested I use the bot to archive, has been archiving every two days, until I lengthened it to 3 which seems more than reasonable to me. Go fuck yourself, and the non-existent rule you are citing as well. Why do some users who have been here longer than me, seem to have no archives whatsoever, and no history longer than last year? Hmmmmm? --TK_/MyTalk^{RW User #45} 23:05, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

^{[citation needed]} Bastard drug Hoover! 23:11, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Nice one, PH, that's what I always think when TK makes his asinine claims. Difflinks, please? Facts? Meh, arguing with a congenital liar is a waste of time... ħuman 03:02, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Here you go Huw, off the top of my head. Of course you know many don't archive already, and make your insulting remarks anyway.

• Armondikov - Archives located "somewhere"
• Toast - 2008 appears missing
• Pinto's5150 -
• Sid - Lots of archives listed, nothing in them

And if there are archives for those people, and they are just "relocated" and forgotten to be listed, do you object if I do the same here? --TK_/MyTalk^{RW User #45} 04:59, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

TK, you are a sloppy researcher. And this is not a ad hominem or a plain insult, it is an observation:

Editor	TK's verdict	reality
Armondikov	Archives located "somewhere"	The archives are located at a usual place (User_talk:Armondikov/archive1, etc.), but there is no link on the talk page. That is unfortunate - but not so problematic, as the archived stuff is really outdated.
Toast	2008 appears missing	Toast became a member of this site on Oct 27, 2008. The entries of 2008 can be found in User talk:Toast/Archive01
Pinto's5150		User talk:Pinto's5150/Archive1, User talk:Pinto's5150/Archive2,User talk:Pinto's5150/Archive3,User talk:Pinto's5150/Archive4
Sid	Lots of archives listed, nothing in them	A quick look at the revision history shows that the talk page is always growing, it hasn't been archived yet: the fake archives are just messing with your mind.

Obviously, the rule archiving is a important task and should be done with common sense is stated nowhere. This is called the common-sense-approach.

I have to repeat:

• So, what's not deceitful on oversighting this File:Talk-Global Positioning System - Conservapedia 1264634820907.png? FvC (talk) 01:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

If you can't see that archiving a seemingly ongoing discussion in which the last edit was made seven hours ago is premature - or if you can see it, but don't want to admit it - the fairly simple task of archiving seems to be to much of a challenge for you.

BTW: the great wikipedia doesn't even expect you to create an archive page - as the histories of the talk pages are not deleted, and so the information isn't lost. But it expects a sensible handling of cleaning your slate, too. I suppose that this is just another difference between Conservapedia and Wikipedia.

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 07:48, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Your last edit comment read: Sorry moron, I am not having any ongoing discussions...if you want a bash TK page, create it'

You do indeed have ongoing discussions, though you may prefer undocumented discussions.

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 09:23, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

I know that consistency isn't your forte, but - as Bugler said once - what's good for the goose is good for the gander

TK at CP

TK at RW

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 11:14, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Reno

Really Terry. You live there and you can't even write an article without plagiarising from here and here? It's word-for-word the same.

You could at least spend the time to muddle around with the wording and try and make it yours. But to just copy-paste? Have you no pride in yourself? Are you that much of a scum-bucket that you'll pass others' work off as your own? Last question was rhetorical of course. --PsygremlinПоговорите! 15:33, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Psy, what sloppy research. You omitted to check out the images.

• Reno Arch NevadaMax.jpg : (Photo Courtesy Nevadamax.com) - "Pictures on Nevadamax are not in the public domain and are copyright © Max Chapman Nevadamax.com or from other entities listed with the image. Images cannot be re-published without permission including print and internet display."[1]

I'm sure if I investigate further then the others will also be found to have been used without permission. Just tacking "Courtesy" to the web-site name does not exculpate you from plagiarism TK. But I guess old habits die hard.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 10:57, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Ha! The dried up old biddy appears! Sorry, but you are just as big a moron as the others. The email from Max, whom I know, said to credit his pictures that way....and he thanked me for asking before using. Of course always easier for a bitter biddy to assume no one was asked, but that is hardly logical or rational. Nice job, Psy, on the excuse making for the others....but a user changing their name, the history transfers, so no excuse in it not being there, and I would never have been given that latitude, even though the rules here say no one is "better" than another. ^{— Unsigned, by: 69.175.88.90 / talk / contribs}

FAFUXAKE! TK: Lilly =/= SusanG, I am SusanG but didn't change my name: I "left never to come back" & then created a new account as Toast. That's why my older edits are under SusanG & my later ones under Toast. When dealing with you, we always assume the worst - and are usually right! ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 01:19, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

There's no excuse for referring to a woman as a "dried up biddy." It's mildly nauseating that Toast already knows who TK is referring to when he uses terms like this, even when he's wrong. Please stop, TK. 01:56, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

On further investigation I can see it's a Chicago IP address that doesn't appear to be an anonymous proxy. My comments above stand minus the entreaty to TK above. Toast, you are lovely. 02:02, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

That IP is a paid anonymous proxy. Whoever is using this service has paid to use an IP from a different location. Judging by the context and wording of the above post, I'd say it is definiately TK. 193.200.150.152 (talk) 06:06, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm guessing TK's "e-mail from Max" is about as real as his "frequent conversations" with James Hong. --PsygremlinKhuluma! 17:23, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

rant

possibly because i've been drinking, i think it's important to tell you this now. conservapedia makes me sick. a bunch of borderline racists banging on about how evil liberals are, milking the deaths of those that aren't in line with your fucking ridiculous ideologies anyway you possibly can for your own selfish political ends, blocking anyone just for the fucking hell of it, and you TK, taking advantage of a fucking idiot like andy schlafly. doing his dirty work, quoting him because you know he's too thick to see through your act, and generally bringing modern day shame to the name of christianity, something which started with good intentions. pure and simple, you're just a bad man. SJ ^Debaser 03:12, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey, you hypocritical cunt

Here's a suggestion - either stop posting here, stop blocking people for being a member of a site supporting vandalism (which you know is a lie - oh, and please quote the LA Times as gospel, so I can quote what they said about CP as gospel), or block yourself from CP. Your call. --Psygremlin話しなさい 10:02, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Why even mess around with my userpage, etc. at CP, stating first that it was a user request to delete everything, and second to change the block settings to infinite for my membership here? I'd hate for you to be blocked from CP yourself, so I suggest you just please leave this site. It is only for your own good. Aboriginal Noise ^{Theist, barely hanging by a nail} 15:22, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

So, are you officially stating that everyone is not welcome here at RW Aboriginal Noise? Just do that, and I am more than happy to leave, knowing that all along the statements made on this wiki have never been true, and sysops here are no different than on CP....enforcing the unwritten RW rules as they deem they should be, and ignoring, always with a convoluted explanation the written ones, like the chart above makes excuses for no archives. I like making idiots like Psygremlin and the others dance to my tune, making hateful and mean-spirited remarks to innocuous remarks that make a lie of the so-called mission here, and show outsiders just how hateful liberals are. If your intentions as Wes on CP were so pure, it is indeed odd you participate here in the hate these people display....just a thought. --TK_/MyTalk^{RW User #45} 00:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Admitting it TK? That's why you do anything on the net: "I like making [...] dance to my tune" Those with no position or influence in real life take advantage of their near anonymity to bully those whom they would otherwise be unable to defeat. BTW Lily is no connection with SusanG or me. ^yummy &  ^honey_{(or marmalade)} 00:06, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

The suggestion, you idiot, is that you should block yourself at CP for being a "member of a vandal site" if you continue to edit here. Of course you are "welcome" here, you moron, but shouldn't you be slightly consistent? ħuman 02:20, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

That is quite what I meant to say, the bit about consistency. Pre-coffee WesleyS Aboriginal Noise can be a bit cranky. Aboriginal Noise ^{Theist, barely hanging by a nail} 03:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You - Matthew 7:12

larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 19:16, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Especially for you...

Not my own work, but taken from the Drudge Retort. See, Terry, that's how attribution works. Easy, isn't it? --PsygremlinRunāt! 11:52, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

• If a liberal doesn’t believe that abortion is morally acceptable, she doesn’t have one.
• If a conservative doesn’t believe that abortion is morally acceptable, he or she wants to prevent anyone from having one.

• When a liberal asks where he gets his news, he’ll give legitimate sources such as the N.Y. Times or Washington Post.
• When a conservative asks where he gets his news, he won’t usually answer because it’s not from legitimate news sources.

• A liberal sees wrong and tries to right it.
• A conservative sees wrong and if it involves another conservative, he claims it’s biased.

• A liberal believes most foreign policy issues are best dealt with by taking diplomatic measures.
• A conservative believes we should bomb first and ask questions later.

• A liberal doesn’t mind his hard earned money going to legitimate government programs.
• A conservative hates all things government, but doesn’t mind his hard earned money going towards multi-million dollar bonuses for CEOs.

• When a liberal thinks about education, he thinks about college.
• When a conservative thinks about education, he thinks about grade school and high school.

• A liberal knows that a fact is information that is verifiable.
• A conservative thinks a fact is something you can link to. It might be just somebody’s opinion, but if you can link to it, he believes it’s acceptable to use it as a “fact.”

• A liberal debates with facts.
• A conservative debates by insulting the other person.

• A liberal evaluates information and forms an opinion.
• A conservative gets his opinions from right-wing pundits.

• A liberal debates by citing events that have occurred.
• A conservative debates by predicting events he believes will occur.

• A liberal debates using facts.
• A conservative debates the facts.

• If a conservative doesn’t like guns, he’s not a real conservative and is branded a wuss.
• If a liberal doesn’t like guns, he might want to ban guns, but most only want to ban assault weapons.

• If a conservative is a vegetarian… What are you, kidding me? A conservative vegetarian? Ha!
• If a liberal is a vegetarian, who cares.

• If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how his political party can capitalize on it.
• A liberal wonders how to solve the problem without getting anybody killed.

• If a conservative is homosexual, he hates himself but likes underage boys.
• If a liberal is homosexual, he wants the same rights as everyone else.

• If a conservative is down-and-out, he blames liberals and minorities for his problems.
• A liberal goes to college and develops skills that will make him prosperous.

• If a conservative doesn’t like a talk show host, he rants, raves, and complains until he’s blue in the face about what he believes to be anti-American socialist/fascist ideas, or whatever else the right-wing pundits told him to believe.
• Liberals are too busy with their careers to pay much attention to talk-shows.

• If a conservative is a non-believer… What are you, kidding me? A non-religious conservative? Ha!
• A liberal non-believer doesn’t want his child indoctrinated by religious nut-jobs.

• If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes on Medicare and demands the government keep its hands off it.
• A liberal wants affordable health care for all, insurance company CEOs be damned!

TK, you're a coward

You're a coward. You know I'm right as you used an identical poll from the same company to prove your point. – Nick Heer 06:38, 16 February 2010 (UTC)