Ok, so this is a bit silly, but it’s another wonderful indication of not just how bat-shit insane Conservapedia is, but also how fundamentally (with the emphasis on the “mental” part) dishonest the people running Andrew Schlafly’s right-wing hate-blog are. Maybe it’s a bit harsh to call them “dishonest” – maybe “blinkered idiots who cannot believe that anybody would dare question the very words uttered by Saint Schlafly and must thus deny, deny, deny as if their pitiful lives depended on it” is a more fitting tag for Andy’s clutch of hand-picked thugs.
But I digress. We all know that Andy measures the relevance of his blog by the number of page views and unique visitors, because… well… it’s not like he can use the number of sites, publications or conservative commentators using him as a reference now, can he? Of course, this results in hilarious situations such as Andy declaring March to be a record month… the same month in which a DDoS attack first took Conservapedia off-line, and then resulted in the site being 403-blocked from most of the planet.
Anyway, May was another case in point. Andy daubed his main page with the rather ambiguous, “Conservapedia has broken our May record for unique visitors!” Now, I’m not sure if that means they had more visitors than last May (the logical choice), or more visitors in total, or more visitors than April, or (knowing Andy) “I need a way to talk up my blog, so Mummy continues to fund it.”Either way, it was worth removing the “Please pray for our soldiers on Memorial Day” blurb. Strange – you’d think fierce patriots like Schlafly would be praying for the soldiers every day… bot wait… silly me… it’s Obama’s war now.
It’s also worth noting that while Andy proudly announces “Over 249 million Views & Over 842,000 Edits“, there’s no mention at all of just how many visitors constitute the May record. This prompted a no-doubt-soon-to-be-blocked editor to pose the question, “…how does May 2011 fare in comparison with Jan – Apr 2011? It would be nice to see the actual number, just to be able to compare it with other sites – and add some credibility to the claim ”Television is losing its relevancy, as people flock to Conservapedia for content.” Seems a fair enough request to me. But on Conservapedia, remember, fair requests tend to come from filthy liberals in their never-ending quest for “facts” and “truth” – concepts with which Schlafly and his goons have only a passing acquaintance…
Now who better to answer the query (from a comedic point of view anyway) than Conservapedia’s very own Ken Demyer. I’m sure now you can rest easy, knowing that everything will be come crystal clear and will be explained in a sane, rational, concise manner, right? Right? Actually, Ken’s managed to outdo even himself when it comes to long, rambling, totally off-topic responses. His reply – repeated in full below – is so full of what-the-fuckery that it’s hard to picture him not dribbling all over his keyboard as he typed it. (Please note our funky new “crazy script” for attempting to put the thoughts inside a crazy man’s head, onto your screen).
August, it appears you want keep drinking in the propaganda the public school system and liberal media promotes unfiltered by critical thinking. You remind me of this historical figure: “Arnold Bennett (born 1867), novelist, playwright, essayist, was a shy man…Shy men like Arnold Bennett usually believe in cities. At an outside table of a Paris cafe Arnold Bennett was sitting with his lover. He filled his glass from a jug of untreated tap water. A waiter leaned towards him. ‘Ah,’ said the waiter, ‘ce n’est pas sage, Monsieur, ce n’est pas sage.’ The waiter’s reproof made Arnold Bennett feel uncomfortable. He avoided looking his lover in the face. But Arnold Bennett believed that the stories about the dangers of drinking untreated tap water were scare-mongering. ‘Look,’ he said, ‘everyone here drinks it all the time.’Defiantly, Arnold Bennett drank down his glass of water. He might then have dabbed at his lips with a handkerchief to stop them glistening in the sun. Arnold Bennett died three months later, from typhoid fever, contracted from Paris drinking water.”
What?? Are those the words of a sane man, let alone an administrator of an on-line encyclopaedia? “Shy men like Arnold Bennett usually believe in cities.” WHAT??!! What the hell do extrovert men believe in? Hamlets? Metropolises? The more Ken writes, the more I become convinced he should be using crayons and not a keyboard.
No true debate on Conservapedia would complete without Andy’s own special brand of “Look! I can talk utter bollocks too!” After a user – quite rightly – took one look at Ken and said, “WTF?” he then made a joking (we think) reference to Andy’s singular obsession: “Show us the stats and we’ll believe the claim, much in the way you demanded to see proof of President Obama’s birth certificate.”
Andy’s (non) reply?
“This site has always provided an enormous amount of statistics on usage. The birth certificate analogy obviously doesn’t fit because there is no constitutional requirement for holding office at issue here.”
Once again… WHAT?! Ok, so Conservapedia does have a “Statistics” page – which is handy if you want to know the total number of page views, or articles, or blocked editors. The latter is easy – take the number of registered users and subtract 20, to allow for the sysops and a few parodists and you’ve got the number of blocked editors. There’s no mention, however, of monthly statistics.
The second half of Andy’s reply shows what a buffoon he is. He’s basically saying “You can’t demand data from me, because there’s no law that says I have to give it to you.” Typical obfuscation from the man.
But we’re not done yet. Oh no, everybody’s favourite swabbie now swaggers onto the scene, to assert his authority… the only authority he’ll ever have anywhere. He promptly posts 3 totally unrelated graphs from unreliable tracking site Alexa, then claims it only took him 45 seconds to find the totally unrelated data.
Which brings us back to Andy’s claim that “this site has always provided an enormous amount of statistics on usage.” Last I checked, Alexa wasn’t Conservapedia, and I’ve yet to see Conservapedia produce any stats on their so-called “record-breaking month”.
Still, what else would you expect when you have a dribbling moron, a compulsive liar and a sociopathic thug answering your questions?