Talk:Essay: RationalWiki admits it has a weirdo, pansie infestation
A couple of things:
- There still seems to be a misunderstanding (well, a feigned misunderstanding, I know you are a smart person, and are just doing this as a stylistic choice) about the use of commas with non-restrictive subordinate clauses. I'm so sure you understand this that I recently suggested, in an edit comment, that the author could ask you for an explanation. So here we are again. You wrote "His 'theory' is that I have a strong attraction to your failing website which is currently losing a lot of web traffic." The "you" being referred to is/are the folks at Rationalwiki. So, do these people have two websites, both of which are failing but only one of which is losing a lot of web traffic? And you have a strong attraction to that one but not the other?
- I'm sure you know how incredibly easy it is to create sockpuppet accounts at both Rationalwiki and Conservapedia. Yet you seem to be proclaiming, apparently with great pride, that you have created sockpuppet accounts at Rationalwiki, and challenged them to find those accounts. Maybe they don't care. In fact, I CHALLENGE YOU TO TELL ME WHAT I HAD FOR BREAKFAST TODAY! If you really want to taunt those people, why don't you just go over there and taunt them directly?
- 1 My reply to SamHB
- 2 References
- 3 Several RationalWiki website editors have experienced mental health issues amidst the public having a much lower interest their website
My reply to SamHB
First of all, as I was researching the topic of atheism while producing a web resource for others, I was very content producing articles at Conservapedia. It was only because RationalWiki's administrator Ace McWicked repeatedly invited me to RationalWiki to debate him that I created a second account at RationalWiki after losing access to the first account I created there in the past and used briefly (I lost the password).
SamHB, my favorite two sentences of my recent essay: "And your wiki's failure to identify my multiple sockpuppet posts at your website is another brick in the high wall of evidence I have provided that more than one editor has edited using the User: Conservative account. And yet, many of the prideful godless men at your website continue to double down on their pigheaded denialism about this matter."
The fact that a website was largely launched in response to the edits emanating from the User: Conservative account and has a web page on its website specifically and obsessively geared to commenting on this website and yet is unable to get the basic history of the website correct is rather humorous to me. Of course, no true skeptic maintains that one editor has edited using the User: Conservative account.
SamHB, I am just God's humble servant who puts his trousers on one leg at a time (A former U.S. Marine Corps manager told an employee at a company I worked for: Women wear pants. Men wear trousers! He made the mistake of offering an explanation on why he was not wearing the company provided trousers). And I currently share my Conservapedia account with another humble servant of God (who may be a man or woman).
SamHB, what you fail to realize is that most atheists are very prideful (see: Atheism and arrogance). My taunts are certainly not due to great pride, SamHB. They are just away of stripping away the multiple layers of pride that most atheists have. This is so easy for you to observe and readily comprehend that I am surprised that I even have to explain it to you.
The sad truth is that I should be applauded by secular leftists for having diversity within my account. And that I enjoy music from a wide varieties of cultures. But no! This is not the case! Is the User: Conservative account multiracial? Only Andy Schafly knows! SamHB, the User: Conservative account is a living testimony to the fact that secular leftists push their narratives despite the evidence and not because of it!
So many times I have pointed out the failings of atheists to achieve social justice (see: Atheism and social justice and Atheist hypocrisy). And this has helped push RationalWiki towards a frenzy of SJWism that finally imploded their wiki's web traffic and caused a deep rift within their website. SamHB, I am the puppet master and RationalWikians are the puppets! And it's not because I am some super genius that my string pulling has worked so well. I just flash my well-supported articles that Western atheists are not diverse and have failed to achieve social justice in their direction and they charge like angry bulls in a predictable direction (see: Atheism and diversity). Olé! Olé! Olé! You see if I say the sky is blue, atheists being the quarrelsome, socially challenged people they are, they will try to prove I am wrong! See: Atheism and social/interpersonal intelligence
"If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu. See also: Atheism and anger
And of course, the icing on the cake is that they proclaim that they are focused on advancing SJWism, etc. etc. and have little interest in Conservapedia. And yet, the page that is on their website giving the most recent fake news (and some news) about Conservapedia remains and is regularly updated. Talk about denialism! Within prideful atheists/agnostics, is there any deception which is harder to detect than self-deception?
SamHB, you wrote about my sockpuppet at RationalWiki and their failure to detect it: "Maybe they don't care." First of all, this essay have over 13,000 page views! I am so thankful Mr. Schlafy decided to merely update this wiki to the version which has still page views so I could contest your point (Hopefully, Mr. Schafly's decision is not due to any satisfaction he may get when intolerant liberals/leftists look at the view counters and become enraged). Not a day goes by where I am not thankful for the retention of the view counters. By the way, did you know this website has been accessed over 500,000,000 times? And to think this project started off with Andy and his homeschooler students. So sorry I degressed for a few moments.
Getting back to your question, SamHB, like a moth to the flame, RationalWikians read my web content on atheism which tortures their souls because it frequently reminds them of the many failures of their godless ideology. Every year my atheism content at Conservapedia receives hundreds of thousands of views. You see many atheists desperately hope to find some chink or error in my atheism articles so they may attempt to rationalize away my web content. And yet, every atheism article that I or the other user of my account has created and/or contributed to has a talk page where mistakes can be pointed out. The collective of the editors of the User: Conservative welcome constructive feedback and have made a handful of corrections when mistakes were pointed out. You see, we are are not prideful like secular leftists!
As far as the websites that are among the 1.5 billion plus websites in the world that the editors of the User: Conservative have access to, I regret to tell you that that remains a mystery to many and only a select few Conservapedians know. You have to be in the innermost of innermost circles of Conservapedia to know this matter. Try as RationalWikians might to infiltrate Conservapedia's innermost workings over Conservapedia's history at various points, this particular confidential information has never been compromised - and never will be! Believe it or not, it is more shrouded in mystery than the book for middle schoolers that encourages them to question evolution (if such a thing were even possible!).
SamHB, you wrote: "If you really want to taunt those people, why don't you just go over there and taunt them directly?". SamHB, you are at an online encyclopedia with an article on one of the famous strategists and tactions ever produced by man and taught in U.S. military academies and military academies throughout the world. I am of course referring to Sun Tzu. "For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill." SamHB, I certainly don't need to spend a lot of time wrangling with atheists/agnostics at their failing wiki. I just have them come to Conservapedia where they have ready access to a multitude of interconnected articles on atheism. One stop shopping! So easy. So convenient for them. And did you know that atheists have one of the lowest retention rates in the world when it comes to worldviews (see: Atheism and its retention rate in individuals).
Next, Master Tzu wrote: "And therefore those skilled in war bring the enemy to the field of battle and are not brought there by him." And Master Tzu also wrote: "It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle." SamHB, given the intolerance and closed-mindedness of most atheists, I knew should I spend much time at RationalWiki, my material would be often erased/obscured and eventually a so-called "permaban" would be tried to be imposed (see: Atheism and intolerance and Atheism and dogmatism and Atheism and open-mindedness).
In short, posting at Conservapedia was far most efficient and didn't involve some censorious and ham-handed atheist like RationalWiki's administrator Grammar Commie erasing my web content because he cannot produce refuting arguments (see: Atheism debates). After all, Sun Tzu's strategies and tactics utilize the "Eastern tradition of strategy that emphasizes outwitting an opponent through speed, stealth, flexibility, and a minimum of effort." A minimal of effort. Not a maximum of effort, SamHB.
P.S. If you want to know another reason I chose not to spend too much time at RationalWiki, please read the essay section entitled "Message to Ace McWicked from User: Conservative". I do hope AceMicked heeds my advice and chooses not spend much time at RationalWiki. But perhaps given the oppositional and quarrelsome nature of atheists, perhaps I should say that I hope he does spend at lot of time at RationalWiki. Then he will do the exact opposite. Conservative (talk) 03:32, 3 June 2020 (EDT)
P.S.S. Perhaps the reason why RationalWiki has so few editors now is that there website invariably leads them to Conservapedia where their atheism drops like flies! Perhaps that is why RationalWikians became so fearful and enraged when I linked to Conservapedia at their website (see: Atheism and anxiety and Atheism and cowardice and Atheism and anger). It reminds me of vampire movies when vampires are shown crosses. The ex-atheist C.S. Lewis: “A young man who wishes to remain a sound Atheist cannot be too careful of his reading”. See: Rebuttals to atheist arguments and Evidence for Christianity
- Conservative, why must you provoke members of that wiki with descriptions of your own success-proving viewcounts? Their envy and anger have reduced them to charging about hither and yon in an unfocused rage where no one—man, woman, child or beast—is safe from their onslaughts! VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 06:10, 3 June 2020 (EDT)
My reply to User: VargasMilan
VargasMilan, one thing I have noticed about RationalWiki: They can dish out ridicule and mocking, but they cannot take it (see: Atheism and mockery and Mocking of atheism and Atheist hypocrisy). RationalWiki administrator Ace McWicked described RationalWikians perfectly. They are a "bunch of pearl clutching pansies" as Ace McWicked so aptly stated (see: Atheist whining).
Personally, I try to remain calm, cool and objective about politicians. Perhaps, that is why my sockpuppet account went undetected at RationalWiki. I did say that Trump had some "authoritarian tendencies" at their wiki. Of course, when you have rioting in the streets from unruly anarchists and other malcontents (often anarchist are atheists given the rebelliousness of atheism, see: Atheism and anarchism), it's hard not to exercise authority in order to restore order.
Thin-skinned and hypocritical atheists
Both atheists and Muslims have developed a reputation of being thin-skinned (and for wanting to impose their ideology on others). It has been quipped that "Atheism is the easiest religion to troll". Internet trolls often actively pursue trolling atheists due to their penchant of being so proud and so easily angered.
In 2012, The Guardian published an article entitled Limmy's Show: Confessions of an internet troll which had the subtitle There's a witch-hunt going on against internet trolls right now. But, argues Scots funnyman Limmy, randomly goading atheists, jocks and non-existent techno geeks can be fun. And of course, being thin-skinned is symptomatic of having excessive pride.
Breitbart journalist Milo Yiannopoulos, a self-described provocateur, indicates "the reason I have a go at atheists is that it's fun. They are so thin-skinned. They are like libertarians, or...they are like liberal Democrats in the UK or..feminists in fact. They are so easy to wind up... They are so touchy."
Most people and cultures take a very dim view of proud people and some cultures are known for actively engaging humbling successful people and/or proud people (Several Anglosphere nations are known for having tall poppy syndrome and Filipinos are known for having a "crab culture". Crabs in a bucket of water will pull down crabs trying to escape from the bucket).
Atheist trolls and atheist bullying:
See also: Atheist trolls
- Question: How many SJW atheists does it take to screw in a light bulb? Answer: 10 SJW atheists. 4 to debate on whether the bottom part of the light bulb was designed to promote the patriarchy due to its shape. 4 to debate on whether the light bulb receptor was sexist in design and too passive and receptive. And then 2 quarrelsome, socially challenged, obese, SJW atheists to decide who was going to get off the coach and change the light bulb.Conservative (talk) 21:41, 3 June 2020 (EDT)
- Ammi, Ken (2011 or bef.) “Hitler’s Rabbi”. TrueFreethinker website. Retrieved on May 17, 2015.
- The Seven Military Classics of Ancient China, including The Art of War - Amazon
- Sun Tzu Compared to Clausewitz by Walter S. Zapotoczny
- President Donald J. Trump Stands Up For Religious Freedom In The United States, WhiteHouse.gov, May 3, 2018
- "Martin Wefail" on Twitter
- Atheism is the easiest religion to troll
- Limmy's Show: Confessions of an internet troll, The Guardian, Brian Limond The Guardian, Friday 9 November 2012 10.00 EST
- Milo Yiannopoulos vs Atheism
- Atheist trolls
- The distribution of atheist intelligence by Vox Day
- Christian Philosopher Explores Causes of Atheism
Several RationalWiki website editors have experienced mental health issues amidst the public having a much lower interest their website
Take a look at this article: Several RationalWiki website editors have experienced mental health issues amidst the public having a much lower interest their website. RobSFree Kyle! 21:43, 13 April 2021 (EDT)