Forum:Conservapedia reskin

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Conservapedia reskin

Note: This topic has been unedited for 6100 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

I've been working on a conservapedia reskin, but I think I've got as far as my limited formatting skills will take me and was wandering if anyone would like to take it on. I have been ably assisted my modusoperandi, who would like me to assure you all that the large numbers of links to his pages are entirely my doing because he is my idol, and in no way because he's been whoring them all over the article's/my talk pages suggesting that I put them in for him so it doesn't show up that he added them himself. Not even a little bit. --Kelpan 18:49, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes. What he said. Except that it's all Kelpan (started by CS1987). I only added the cussing. I will, however, take the blame if it goes over as well as the Hitchhiker's reskin did. (Did I mention that that was all my fault? You've been blaming Zb and Mordillo for nothing. Nothing!.) Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 19:08, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Need a link to American Fundie Magazine. --Crazyswordsman...With SAVINGS!!!! (T/C) 22:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Official sounding disclaimer: Crazyswordsman is not my sockpuppet. My sockpuppet's name was Barry. Mom threw him in the garbage after he told me to bite off our parakeet's head. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 19:49, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget to link it to Stephen Hawking ran over my cat piece. We don't want those neo-liberals freaks running around. Barry.

You're not fooling me with that again, Mordillo. Mom was pissed when <airquote>Barry</airquote> got me to boil our dog. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 19:55, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

It was you who made me do it! And you made me use English mustard! ~ 19:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I had to say "english" because "poupon" makes me giggle. *giggle* Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 19:59, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Official sounding disclaimer: Who said I was a sock? --Crazyswordsman...With SAVINGS!!!! (T/C) 00:50, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

No one. It's normally me who whores my articles, that's all. And my body too. Can't make a living at either. Maybe I should start working out. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 01:45, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't whore my articles. I didn't write that one. It's just a fav of mine. --Crazyswordsman...With SAVINGS!!!! (T/C) 22:05, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

*Sigh*. I wrote it. Hence the sockpuppet/whoring joke. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 00:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

It is kind of hard to make it funny, a lot of the stuff was copied from the Conservapedia page like the Bible and Lincoln quotes. They aren't really funny, even if you do link an article to them. You might want to consider editing it a bit. --Lt. Sir Orion Blastar (talk) 22:27, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

"Jesus answered and said unto them, 'Verily I say unto you, If ye lack faith, and hath doubt, ye shall suffer that which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall be skeptical of this scripture, Be thou dammed, and be thou cast into Hell; it shall be done. And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in business, believing, ye shall profit.'" Gospel of Matthew, 21:21-22 --Lt. Sir Orion Blastar (talk) 22:27, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Maybe instead of the fig parable for the quote have;

Matthew 5:18-19 Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven.

or

Luke 16:17 It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

and

Romans 6:14 Ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Just a thought. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 22:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Maybe other verses:

Luke 22:36-37 He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. It is written: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors'; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.

Matthew 10:34 Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.

Jude 1:3-4 Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints. For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

Matthew 10:14-16 If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town. I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.

Reasoning that those verses sort of fit Conservative viewpoints of the Fundamentalist Christians. --Lt. Sir Orion Blastar (talk) 01:58, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

MO & Ceridwyn hijack the topic:

Your biblical knowledge never fails to impress me MO :) However the airquotes made me rofl :D ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talk DUN VoNSE arc2.0 11:44, 03 June 2007

You'd be surprised how many atheists have worked their way (slowly, admittedly) through religious and apologist texts. Heck, probably 20% of what I've written here required reading chunks of the Tanakh, NT, and Koran. So, in a way, I can blame Uncyc for forcing me to learn about things, stuff and whatnot. Luckily for this wiki I don't hold a grudge (although I am still a little bitter about having to reread Joshua for a page. Of course, I volunteered for that one. Silly ideas like that are always popping into my head). But I digress... Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 00:11, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Tanakh? Is that the Shinto version of the bible?! ~ 08:55, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, the תנ״ך or מקרא (x7j7n? Yiddish L33t!). My hebrew is a bit rusty (or, to be more precise, nonexistent). It's like the Bible, but without that guy in the last bit. A Shinto version of the bible would be cool. Someone should write it. Make sure that it's got a bunch of samurai. They rule. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 08:53, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

And god created the Shogun, and thy Shogun sayth: LET THERE BE WAR! And the Samurai rejoiced, and there was much blood, mayhem and seppuku.~ 09:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

And it's the תנ"ך, which is actually short for: Torah, Prophets, Hagiography. And btw, Yiddish is actually written in Hebrew letters. Now that, is a piece of information you probably couldn't live another day without knowing....~ 09:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

How did something based on abbreviations of Torah, Prophets & Hagiography become Tanakh? Shouldn't it be Toprohag? Jeez, it's like they don't evin no how 2 spel english real good. Don't even get me started on that crazy backwards printing. It's like it's a whole other language or something.Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 09:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

They're bloody Jews. What do you expect? ~ 09:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. They're not right in the head. If I was them I'd say to Moses "Moses,", I'd say, "Why didn't He give us someplace nice, with hot and cold running icecream and no parents and no school and no curfew and summer break all year 'round?". I'd say that because I imagine that I would've been awfully young back then. Plus I'd make sure that when Aaron made the Golden Calf that it would be made of chocolate under its gold-foil skin. Solid chocolate, like the good easter bunnies. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 09:36, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, you do know that Moses was a stutterer, and therefore when they asked him:"Moses! Where should we go?!" His answer wasn't really "CCCCanaan" he meant to say "CCCCCanada! Where the ice cream is cold and the moose are jolly!" ~ 09:56, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

And to this very day the Israelis kick ass in the winter olympics. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 09:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

But this isn't about that. As a New Zealandite, what do you think about this very American reskin? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 00:11, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

As a New Zealander I don't have much of an opinion on it. As a practicing Christian I find it pretty offensive :P ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talk DUN VoNSE arc2.0 12:21, 04 June 2007

The way I figure it, you cannot save someone who does not want to be saved. If someone makes up their mind against religion and they have a strong opinion of it, it is not worth trying to get them to convert. It is better use of time talking to people interested in learning about God and religion than those who aren't interested. Sure parts of the article are offensive and considered attacks on Christians (well fundamentalists anyway), conservatives, like saying they are in the Klan, or Nazis or something. But I guess it is funny in an offensive way. I went over a flamewar over an UnNews article, I wrote about that mocked two left-wingers and got personal attacks on me in the talk page accusing me of attacking them, and ultimately the article was rewritten by the angry left-winger to attack right-wingers, but that is OK, because right-wingers aren't real human beings anyway, according to that guy, and neither am I a human being, so nobody got harmed. --Lt. Sir Orion Blastar (talk) 02:09, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, Ray Comfort is New Zealandian and Ken Ham is/was Australiavish...so your area does have some, um, nuts. That you find it offensive is probably because you have trouble separating an attack on one group of Christians (the nuts who, evidence be damned, live in a universe that was made in precisely six days by a God of Wrath) as one on all Christians (the ones that like Jesus and puppies and lolcats). But we've sort of had this conversation before. I was wearing my blue tie, if memory serves. If we satirize the worst of Aukland by saying "The Auklandish are funny looking and smell like bratwurst'", that isn't the same as saying "All New Zealanders are funny looking and smell like bratwurst'". Although they are. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 00:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes this conversation does sound rather familiar ;P But you did ask for my opinion. Initially I found it amusing, especially the header section, but the more I read the less I liked. *I* don't have a problem separating myself from those people which are the butt of the joke here, but I do worry that we are all being lumped into the same category. You and I should really have a long chat sometime about my interpretations on evolution/creation/science etc. I personally have no trouble marrying the two concepts together and agree that people who utterly refuse to entertain the other side's idea are a bit silly, but I mean that on both sides of the arguement :P Also, you should note the pokey-out-tongue-smiley in my above comment. Though I found it mildly offensive, I didn't find it upsetting, an important distinction. Also Aucklanders are frequently the butt of jokes here too, we call them JAFAs and completely distinguish between them and regular New Zealanders. So the concept isn't actually as difficult for me as you might think. :D ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talk DUN VoNSE arc2.0 12:49, 04 June 2007

Don't forget the bratwurst smell. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 01:06, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

C'mon, I write a huge chunk of text and you have only one line in reply for me? :( ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talk DUN VoNSE arc2.0 01:13, 04 June 2007

Well, it was the whole point of this forum. Obviously. That you believe in Adam & Eve and the Rapture and think that lolcats are funny doesn't really matter, as long as you aren't pushy about them. Especially lolcats. As long as your God isn't their God (and He's not, unless you can read AFM and say, "I agree with this."), you'll be offended by my heresy, blasphemy and nudity and I'll furrow my brow and "Tut, tut" or perhaps "Tsk, tsk." at your WoW page. I'll try to avoid being too overbearing about my own insane beliefs, like my belief that lolcats aren't all that funny, if you try to avoid Pascal's Wager, the junkyard 747 and saving the soul that I don't have. Our collect insanity can be as collectively insane as we want, as long as it doesn't result in fisticuffs. I bruise easily. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 01:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Wait, you're naked?!

I think you may have got the wrong idea from my comments:

1. You're awesome and I think very highly of you, you never fail to make me laugh with your comments all over the site <3
2. Kralnor IS funny. I'll accept not everyone finds lolcats as inherently brilliant as I do, but don't knock Kralnor. It is my greatest work thus far in my life and is written, I believe, in a style very much accepted here. See Fisher Price: A Retrospective if you don't agree.
3. I have no idea what Pascal's Wager is.
4. No guarantees about trying to save your soul :P (Thats actually a compliment. I don't know why people get so defensive about it, it shows the person cares... )
5. I'd never want to get into an arguement with you. Somehow any mention of Christiantiy seems to provoke one unintentionally, however let me state this once and for all: You are more than welcome to your own opinion, as I'm certain you will agree I am also welcome to mine. I'll never stuff mine down your throat (or anyone's for that matter) however if you ask my opinion about a religiously-charged article and I respond that I find it offensive, never take that as me being upset with you. Its just a statement of a fact. I also find 99% of articles on VFD offensive by their mere existance. Finding something offensive is different to being offended. Which I have yet to be by anything you've said. Srsly. I <3 ya. ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talk DUN VoNSE arc2.0 01:49, 04 June 2007

1. Well, I am adorable. You've probably seen the lolMO with the caption "I is adorable"
2. I have no idea what this Kralnor is, nor Wow, nor anything to do with any MMORPG. As such I'm not critiquing it's goodness, as it's referencing something about which I know nothing.
3. Pascal's wager (courtesy of Wikipedia), condensed version: it is a better "bet" to believe that God exists than not to believe, because the expected value of believing (which Pascal assessed as infinite) is always greater than the expected value of not believing. The long version of this has holes most people could drive a truck through.
4. The fixation with the soul bothers me because too many people focus on what happens to it, next, maybe...rather than this world, here, now. If being a good person (who is, at most, a deist. Occasionally. I'm not entirely immune to argumentum ad ignorantiam) here and now buys me a one-way ticket to Hades, paid for by an all-loving God, then that's where I'll go. I'll chill with Gandhi and the deist members of the Founding Fathers. We'll start a band.
5. Cool. When you get into political satire (and you should, it's quite an exercise trying to make something that isn't funny at all at least a little bit funny) I won't get mad at you. I too, less than testicles you. I hope that's a compliment. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 03:04, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

1. Awww that would be so cute. If I had a picture of you, I'd add that caption then post it here :)
2. See, everyone says that and it irks me. Surely, anyone can read it and understand what its about with no knowledge of warlocks, WoW or any MMORPG. The wisdom contained within in universal. /sadpanda
3. I can't even conceive of a truck big enough to correctly illustrate the size of said holes.
4. Come on, you're smarter than that! Being a good person in this life does not automatically buy you a one way ticket to Hell and you know it. :P On the flipside that band would probably be awesome. /nods sagely.
5. You say "when" as if its going to happen. The only politics I know anything (even vaguely) about is NZ politics and not only does nobody care but most people wouldn't have the foggiest idea about it and it would languish forever in obscurity like my other two pieces. The only article I'm involved with that has any hope of catching anyone's attention is a collaboration which will probably only reach the mainspace once all my contributions have been deleted, barring SPAG. ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talk DUN VoNSE arc2.0 03:15, 04 June 2007

1. See my userpage
2. I'm bowing out on this one. I'm a nerd, but I'm not that kind of nerd. Needs more wookies.
3. Yes, it's a bad argument, but it's one that still pops up...generally as a veiled threat (like here). Warning: I'm not polite to the troll. One thing I can't stand is being threatened.
4. Matt 22:13, 25:41, John 10:9, 14:6. John 3:36 (and a bunch more that are probably way better than these, but my dinner is getting cold and I must eat said dinner, preferably while it's still somewhat warm). I don't believe that Jesus Christ was the son of God. Bible says I go to Hell no matter what else I do. That's crap, that's a threat and something completely unworthy of an infinite, loving, all-powerful, chocolate-coated God. If the Bible is the Word of God (or it's the suitably inspired Word, inerrant or not), and it says that non-believers to go Hell, then I'm going to Hell. That's extortion and it's deeply deeply wrong. I can't put it any more politely than that. I'm tired and hungry, so I'll stop this bit...I'm getting cranky.
5. New Zealand has politics? /me ends on a joke. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 03:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

2. I'd just like ONE person, one day to objectively read it and appreciate it is all.

3. Its not a threat, its consequences of making (or not making) a decision, albeit fairly harsh consequences. Sorry that it makes you cranky, I was merely pointing out that you and I both know that the endeavour of trying to live ones life as a good person isn't in and of itself either sinful nor godly. On its own it won't get you into Heaven, no. But neither will that in itself condemn you to Hell. Thats all :) Hope your dinner was nummy! ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talk DUN VoNSE arc2.0 04:12, 04 June 2007

How many people play this <airquotes>World of Handicraft</airquotes> you say exists? Some of them must be here...

McDonald's and a beer. The main course was blah, but the drink is cool and refreshing. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 05:10, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Sounds divine! Pun intended ;P ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talk DUN VoNSE arc2.0 05:13, 04 June 2007

Ooo! I forgot that I had strawberries in the fridge. You'd think that they'd taste like straw (much like mushrooms taste like mush) but they don't. So, what forum do we highjack next? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 05:30, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Some idiot butts in

loltapirs are superior to lolcats. Thus Spake Myself. --The Acceptable  Cainad  (Fnord) 05:55, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Um, yeah. Good luck with that whole, um, thing you've got going on there. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 05:58, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I lied. When you mentioned "lolcats", I had no idea what you were talking about. So I used the Wickedpedia, and they had a link. I was amused, because it is a nearly identical concept, but the subject is an animal most of my fellow Americans don't know exists. --The Acceptable  Cainad  (Fnord) 07:27, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I know what tapirs are. But then I'm not American. And I learneded about them from bookz. ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talk DUN VoNSE arc2.0 07:30, 04 June 2007

So... um...

Anyone actually going to help then? Sorry if you find it offensive Ceridwyn; reading it over I realise that it is currently rather dominated by biblical quotations etc which rather imply that it's taking the mick out of Christians in general, which believe me, was not the intention. I'm not really happy with the written content on the left column of the page in general and if you'd like to make some improvements to it that it would be very much appreciated. I can't stress enough that the people writing for conservapedia are nothing like the Christians on this website. They are (by-and-large) crazy close-minded fundamentalists with no sense of humour. --Kelpan 07:51, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Again, please don't be sorry that I find it offensive. I used the term fairly lightly. I'm not crying myself to sleep don't worry :P I was merely expressing an opinion. I can't really in conscience tell you how to fix it so that it only mocks a small group of Christians rather than all of us though can I? :P Best of luck with the project, sorry the Me vs. MO bit kinda detracted from the overall idea here :) Its just what we do. ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talk DUN VoNSE arc2.0 10:57, 04 June 2007

I think you need to take a few more liberties with the source material. If your problem with these people is that they're humourless, it stands to reason that the things they say won't be all that funny.

Instead of the Bible quotes, how about some quotes (real or not) from actual fundies? Putting aside the issue of being offensive (forever, I hope), unedited Bible quotes really aren't particularly funny (other than Acts, 4:9-15, which describe James accidentally dropping a paint can on Peter's head; Peter believes that Luke hit him, and then turns and to poke Luke in the eyes. Luke responds by holding his hand vertically between his eyes, then retaliates by sticking a claw hammer up Peter's nose. But I digress) Indeed, the specific Bible quotes you're using are more depressing than amusing.

Perhaps you should go to Conservapedia's roots, and make it look like it was put together by some poor home-schooled kids, deliberately kept repressed and naive by their parents? "Daddy says that America is the best country in the world, but I must never touch it in case I become infected with its evils"

Anyway, just a few random thoughts. Lose the heavy handed KKK stuff; it's just too bitter. Oh, and don't link to them; they don't deserve the traffic. --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 12:05, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

You are right, sort of like calling them Nazis, although a lot of left-wingers accuse Conservatives of being in the KKK or being Nazis as a form of an insult. It sort of invokes Godwin in that if you compare something to Nazis, you lose the argument automatically. --Lt. Sir Orion Blastar (talk) 15:52, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

<rant>Oh, God damn it, when did conservatives start getting so bloody thin skinned? If you identify with the right, at some point you'll be called a Nazi. If you identify with the left, at some point you'll be called a Commie. If you identify with neither, you'll be called a cowardly fence-sitter. It's the way of the world, just fucking deal with it.</rant> --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 02:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Interesting one. In general I agree with the point about comparing people to Nazis; it's always over the top and people then won't take you seriously. However in this particular case, comparing extreme right people (as on conservapedia) with the kkk is not that far off the mark if you view homophobia as equivalent to racism. Having said that it's also an exaggeration since I doubt many of them lynch people in their spare time. In any case it's pretty clear this topic stirs people up a bit much and is a bit serious for laughs so I don't think I'll pursue it further. --Kelpan 10:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

No the ultra-right-wing zealots don't lynch people, but they do write them angry letters telling them how they are condemned to hell for being gay or say something like that in public or on TV. As if God has nothing better to do than just condemn to hell anyone the ultra-right-wingers disagree with all day? I guess that includes gay people, left-wingers, drug users, atheists, and anyone else on their list. God might have other plans, because I hear that God loves sinners and forgives them. That even gay people, left-wingers, drug users, and atheists are loved by God, and can live a moral life and have just as much chance of being forgiven for their sins as a Christian would. If not, then we are all doomed because we are all sinners in some way. Anyway let God be the judge, and live and let live, and don't judge someone for being different than you in the first place. --Lt. Sir Orion Blastar (talk) 06:12, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

If only more people did the WWJD? thing. Off topic: Can someone talk to Pat Robertson for me? He wants me to "take out" Hugo Chavez. Should I bring him flowers, and what kind of a restaurant should I take him to? How many dates should we go on before I put out? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 13:05, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I dunno, what would Jesus do? -- (but) Untrue  Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 20:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I believe that Dating Tips According to James was found to be way too apocryphal, so it was cut...we may never know what He would do. Plus JC appears to have never made it past first base, so He's probably not the best source anyway. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 20:40, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Linking to them is kind of the whole point of it. I personally find a lot of their stuff much funnier than most of what's on here. If people don't want to give them any extra publicity then the whole thing's a non-starter really. Anyway I'll try to lighten it all up a bit and get it more in the spirit of uncyclopedia. --Kelpan 12:16, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

L hijacks the topic:

>pull out rifle

TAKE THIS TOPIC TO CUBA. --L 07:55, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

We're already going to Cuba. -- (but) Untrue  Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 10:09, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Hijacking is the only way to make sure we get there --Pieface 11:21, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

and the seatbelt sign is on. Sit the hell down before they turn this plane around. It'd be kind of ironic if you tried to hijack the plane, but it turned around and landed back where it had taken off because you disturbed the flight. Jackass. Great, my tiny meal has gone cold. Oh, it's on now, buddy. /me rolls up sleeves, gets ready to kick some Monty Python referencing/forum topic hijacking/no link to their userpage in their signature having/lost my train of thought/when I was a child I had a fever/my hands felt just like two balloons... Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 15:29, 4 June 2007 (UTC)