User talk:Aschlafly

From Conservapedia

Post Comments Here

Andy, just a quick message. User:GeorgeH has, accidentally or not, scrambled the main talk page (here). Because of further edits, I don't know how to undo it, so I thought I'd bring it to your attention. JohnFraiser 09:17, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

Thanks, I fixed it. It could have been an accident by GeorgeH, I suppose. We'll give him the benefit of the doubt.--Andy Schlafly 09:38, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

Name based blocks

Hello, I was just curious about the spate of blocks I've seen from yourself and other admins here whereby people using aliases have been blocked instantly with the comment "Please recreate your account with your real first name and last initial". This seems a little harsh, as a lot of people prefer to remain anonymous on the internet, and secondly I note that a lot of the admins themselves do not adhere to this rule, such as TK (who has been very useful and polite to me in the past) and "Conservative". I was wondering if you thought perhaps this rule may be driving potential useful editors away from the site? MattS 19:01, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

This isn't Wikipedia, where anonymity can be used to cover up wrongdoing or deceit, or a user name can be dreamed up to try to make a point. If someone is contributing legitimately here and the name doesn't reflect an ax to grind, then we're flexible. But if not, then let's see a real first name and last initial. There's no legitimate reason to hide that.--Andy Schlafly 19:07, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

I agree with you in requiring people to register, but the fact is people could just make up a name if they really wanted to, and therefore the people with good intentions for the project who use a common alias when contributing to internet based applications will not return when they get blocked outright. At the end of the day it is your decision, and you are obviously free to set the rules as you see fit, but I fear you may be scaring off useful people with an essentially pointless restriction. MattS 19:13, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

If they are contributing legitimately, as I said, and if their name is not some misguided statement, they should not be blocked. Also, there is an appeal process.

We're not trying to be like Wikipedia or other internet sites, which quickly degenerate into idiotic statements or hoaxes by people hiding behind anonymous names.--Andy Schlafly 19:19, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

Fair enough. I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm expressing concerns for the good of the site. If you feel the process does not deter contributions then I will go with your judgement. MattS 19:21, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

The rule is made clear on the signup page, and legitimate users almost always happily recreate their accounts to follow the rules or discuss the matter by email. Those who don't are overwhelmingly vandals, and blocking proactively saves a lot of trouble. DouglasA 20:23, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

Favorite Music?

Dear Mr. Schafly,

I was wondering, what kind of music do you enjoy? What are some of your favorite bands or genres of music? I'm always curious as to what type of music people like, and so I figured I'd just go out and ask, if that is ok with you? If you do not feel like answering, that is ok, I am just very interested in this kind of stuff. Thanks! Pnino 23:03, 26 October 2009 (EDT)

Most of my favorites are on this list: Essay:Greatest Conservative Songs. I've liked some liberal songs too, such as some of Sting's or R.E.M.'s stuff. Uh oh, I see we need an entry for Sting!--Andy Schlafly 23:29, 26 October 2009 (EDT)

Oh man, I'm a huge R.E.M. fan; what's your favorite album of theirs? I'm gonna have to go with Automatic for the People closely edging out Document. Pnino 14:45, 27 October 2009 (EDT)

Always glad to meet people who like R.E.M. I personally liked Around the Sun, good CD there (and sadly the only R.E.M one I have). RandolfH 00:37, 28 October 2009 (EDT)

Question:

I was editing the sleep article when I got to the section where it stated that sleep is derived from the German words "Schlaf" and Schlafen", which mean sleep. I checked it on a translator, and it did indeed translate to sleep. I was wondering if your heritage is perchance German. RandolfH 00:44, 28 October 2009 (EDT)

My last name is indeed Swiss German. It's a common name in certain towns in Switzerland.--Andy Schlafly 08:58, 28 October 2009 (EDT)

Explanation/apology

Mr Schlafly: I'm writing at the encouragement of Karajou, who kindly unblocked me after I explained and apologized for past behavior at Conservapedia, and I want to convey the same to you. I created new usernames after blocks several times, which I know violates protocol and I should not have done. But (except for one instance--see below) all the blocks were (in my opinion, at least) hasty and unjustified. One block was for blatantly moronic vandalism, which was actually committed by my young nephew under my username. That was careless on my part and will not happen again. Karajou found "the bulk of [my] editing [to be] professional and well-done" (quote from his email to me) and decided to give me a 2nd chance, and I hope you agree.

This username is my real first name and middle and last initials (first name, last initial was taken already). I have an advanced degree in English and have taught writing and literature in the past at the college and high school levels. I would like to contribute mainly through copyediting and by improving and creating articles on literary subjects. I'll steer clear of contetious issues. ChrisFV 17:57, 28 October 2009 (EDT)

Welcome back! Apology accepted. I look forward to learning from your edits.--Andy Schlafly 18:11, 28 October 2009 (EDT)

Thanks much! I will endeavor to make edits that are educational. ChrisFV 22:06, 28 October 2009 (EDT)

Math articles

Thanks for your changes to gradient and vector space! I don't mean to step on your toes by editing the same articles right after you -- I just saw your edits at Recent Changes and thought a bit more expansion would be helpful (those were articles I'd never looked at before). Feel free to revert my changes or make additional improvements! I think your emphasis on calculus on these pages will be valuable to students' understanding, and I hope I haven't diluted it too much. Best, --MarkGall 20:50, 31 October 2009 (EDT)

Mark, I appreciated your edits very much! I'll edit some more math pages later tonight. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly 21:29, 31 October 2009 (EDT)

Crazy thinking

Both views, that which exalts homosexuality as if it were the world's most noble calling, and that which mercilessly condemns homosexuals, are equally short-sighted. God loves everyone, and his rules for living should be followed for no other reason then the fact that His rules give us life and joy. --Ed Poor ^Talk 14:57, 1 November 2009 (EST)

That Comment

That comment is simply untrue. Most evolutionists I know (which is a large sample size) know the bible better than half the population

Pgmm, half of public schoolers probably cannot even read. Evolutionists never read the Bible once they latch onto the evolution belief system. Everyone knows that. If you're an evolutionist, then the odds are 100:1 against your spending any significant time reading the Bible.--Andy Schlafly 17:15, 2 November 2009 (EST)

Support for your claim that "half of public schoolers probably cannot even read?" And your statement that "Evolutionists never read the Bible once they latch onto the evolution belief system," in using extremes, proves false. It IS possible to remain a Christian while believing in evolution. I believe firmly in evolution, and yet I have read the Bible cover to cover. Avoge 18:20, 2 November 2009 (EST)

Reading the Skeptic's Annotated Bible website or any other "the Bible is full of errors and contradictions" website does not make an evolutionist more knowledgeable in the Bible than other people. Quite the opposite, in fact. Despite what they pretend to be, such websites are fueled by misconceptions, half-truths and outright lies and nothing else. I've never met an evolutionist who can accurately recite Christian beliefs. Just look at the paragons of evolutionists like Dawkins, Hitchens, Myers, etc. They are all completely ignorant and base every single one of their arguments against Christianity on straw men, and they are proud of their ignorance. Evolutionists are the epitome of Romans 1:20-23: "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles." In fact, the rest of that section thoroughly applies to evolutionists as well, but the whole part about exchanging the glory of God for images made to look like men and animals says "evolution" to me. Jinx McHue 18:48, 2 November 2009 (EST)

Avoge, you're not fooling anyone here. We all know evolutionists. My college and law school classes were filled with people who believed in evolution. Most professors (particularly the underachieving ones) believe in evolution. Virtually none of them read the Bible. You could ask a typical college professor the most basic question about the Bible and he'd be totally clueless. For example, how many of the Gospels are attributed to eyewitnesses? 99% of evolutionists would have no idea ... unless they learned it before they fell for the evolution belief system. If you read the Bible cover to cover, most likely it was before you became an evolutionist.--Andy Schlafly 18:56, 2 November 2009 (EST)

I am not trying to fool anyone. I'm saying that making a claim that "Evolutionists never read the Bible once they latch onto the evolution belief system" is being fairly closed minded, as, although I am not saying it is common, it is very possible for evolutionists to read the bible for knowledge, just as it is possible for creationists to read Darwin's theories for the exact same purpose. My point is, believing in evolution does not mean that a person has to abandon all forms of Christianity and its lessons, morals, and beliefs, many of which I believe have great merit. Avoge 13:20, 3 November 2009 (EST)

Avoge, you'd have a fine career with tobacco companies, by claiming that cigarette smoking doesn't cause lung cancer because there is one 95-year-old smoker. Look, it's an undeniable fact that once people fall for the evolution belief system, they never earnestly read the Bible with any regularity again. The cause-and-effect is even stronger than cigarettes causing lung cancer. Many evolutionists even brag about not reading the Bible. Are there 95-year-old smokers? Yes. Does that disprove the overwhelming correlation? Of course not.--Andy Schlafly 14:42, 3 November 2009 (EST)

Liberal traits

I was looking at Category:Liberal_Traits and the question of harassment came to mind. Liberals often harass people they disagree with. Do you think that's covered by one of the already listed traits, or would it be something new to be added? Jinx McHue 00:29, 3 November 2009 (EST)

Please add it. There was just an example of this with the gay marriage crowd causing the firing of a Christian from a Brookstone retail store in Massachusetts.--Andy Schlafly 09:41, 3 November 2009 (EST)

Fort Hood Request

Andy,

I realize it's not precisely news, but is there any way we could have a message of condolences and prayers for the families of those killed at Fort Hood on the main page? They need all the prayerful support they can get right now. --Benp 19:43, 6 November 2009 (EST)

I second that. -- Jeffrey W. Lauttamus _Discussion 19:44, 6 November 2009 (EST)

Me too, honestly. --Joaquín Martínez 19:47, 6 November 2009 (EST)

I'm all for prayer, and will say one myself. We don't typically put prayer messages on the Main Page, but it's fine to consider one. How about something like "We pray for the victims of the Fort Hood massacre and we pray that America takes steps to prevent this type of attack from happening again." Other suggestions are welcome--Andy Schlafly 19:57, 6 November 2009 (EST)

I think that would be a fine sentiment. I realize it's not typical, but then again, there's nothing typical about this situation. Let's all pray that it stays that way. --Benp 20:12, 6 November 2009 (EST)

Didn't we do something similar for the Virginia Tech Massacre? I could have sworn we did. The statement above seems good. -- Jeffrey W. Lauttamus _Discussion 20:17, 6 November 2009 (EST)

Thank you, Andy! --Benp 20:36, 6 November 2009 (EST)

Two usernames on the same IP

Well, after inquiring as to what I've been doing for the past few days, my wife is actually interested in creating an account. She's a journalist and said that it would be "fun to edit stuff and keep me in practice." I just wanted to give you a heads up that her name (probably something along the lines of BriannaL, BriLauttamus, etc.) and mine will be editing from the same IP address. I hope that this doesn't cause any issues. Thanks, Andy! -- Jeffrey W. Lauttamus _Discussion 12:26, 7 November 2009 (EST)

Jeffrey, that's great! A most hearty welcome to your wife! It's no problem for you to have multiple accounts with your IP and I can't imagine anyone blocking your account after your many fine contributions here. Thanks and Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly 12:36, 7 November 2009 (EST)

Stubs

I've noticed a lot of articles that have the {{stub}} attached to them. Do we have any criteria for a stub article? Many of the articles that are "stubs" contain enough information to get a working idea of the concept being discussed. Some do need to be expanded, but many are fine just the way they are. Is it okay to remove the stub templates without discussion if the page contains enough working information? -- Jeff W. Lauttamus _Discussion 17:33, 11 November 2009 (EST)

Excellent point, and please do remove some of the stub templates. I've removed many of them. I think they are a well-intentioned holdover from the Wikipedia mindset brought to us by some good editors who defected from Wikipedia. In reality we want conciseness here, and don't buy into Wikipedia's somewhat childish attitude that more words must be better!--Andy Schlafly 18:11, 11 November 2009 (EST)

Is there a way I can e-mail who I really am?

Andy, I'm concerned with liberal stalking on the web, which is why I use my current ID, but I would have no problem e-mailing my contact info and CV. As little as my editing has been around here, I find the experience here to be intellectually challenging. Brown25 19:23, 15 November 2009 (EST)

If you're contributing in a legitimate way, then your ID is fine. There's no need to email your contact info and CV. Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly 20:23, 15 November 2009 (EST)

Notability policy?

Andy and whoever else's listening-- User:Ameda and I have been having a brief discussion about a recent vandal who added an unencyclopedic article on a celebrity. Ameda blanked it; the vandal restored it; she blanked it again; he restored it again; then I came in and changed a few sentences so it is currently encyclopedic. Since then, we've been asking whether it should stay (since it's correct) or be deleted (since it might not be notable). I've been searching for our guidelines on notability, but I haven't found any.

If we have a policy, I'd appreciate knowing. If not, I think we should discuss this in the open rather than have it fleshed out inconsistently case-by-case. --EvanW 23:50, 15 November 2009 (EST)

You're right. It's unencyclopedic and its repeat contributor will be blocked. Thanks and Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly 00:00, 16 November 2009 (EST)

Are you saying it was unencyclopedic in its original form, or it still is now? If it is now, please by all means delete it. I'd appreciate some clarification in the general editing guidelines on this matter, too - as they stand now, they seem to admit any true, non-gossip material no matter how non-notable it might be. --EvanW 00:29, 16 November 2009 (EST)

Wikipedia uses its "non-notable" criterion to censor and delete information about conservatives and conservative projects. For example, the entry about Conservapedia was initially deleted there in such a biased manner. We're going to avoid such bias. Instead, we throw out things that are non-encyclopedic, which I thought I was doing at your suggestion. The entry you reference (or this issue) doesn't seem worth spending more time on. But if you think it can be made encyclopedic and want to recreate it, please feel free to do so.--Andy Schlafly 08:28, 16 November 2009 (EST)

Typo

Just a quick one, I note there's a typo on the main page and I don't seem to be able to edit it: "pidgin". MattS 10:11, 16 November 2009 (EST)

Got it. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly 10:12, 16 November 2009 (EST)

Spring 2010 Class

I was just curious what class you plan to teach next semester? --KristiM 00:42, 17 November 2009 (EST)

I'll probably teach the next course in writing. American government is also possible, but less likely. I'll probably teach that in the Fall 2010. There's still time if you want to catch up in the ongoing Economics course: our final exam is not until early January.--Andy Schlafly 08:49, 17 November 2009 (EST)

Public debate.

You are very outspoken against atheism and evolution, and I was wondering if you would participate in a online debate open to the public. There will be two threads created in Kongregate on Saturday Nov. 21, at around 12:00pm EST. One of the threads would be on evolution, with the other on God. If you decline, the debate will be cancelled. If possible, we would like permission to add information to the Atheism and Evolution if the debate is won by the atheist/evolutionist; However the debate will still go on if you decline that part of the offer. The winner will be decided by vote of people that did not post in either thread and will be volunteers, and the debate will continue until nobody post in the thread for two days.

EDIT: and for the purpose of the debate, you cannot reference the bible as disproof of evolution.

Interesting proposal, but it has two flaws: first, the truth is not determined by majority vote. You end up with biased Wikipedia that way. Second, any ban on the Bible is unacceptable. Also, the content of Conservapedia entries are not bargaining chips.--Andy Schlafly 15:59, 17 November 2009 (EST)

How do you propose we end the debate? I am open to suggestions. Using the bible to disprove evolution is like using the Qur'an to disprove Jesus was the son of god. It just does not work that way.

Proposed format

I've created a PDF of the first 3 chapters of Mark and put them here: [1]. Does anyone know a better uploading service/method of putting them on the CP space itself? DouglasA 19:51, 17 November 2009 (EST)

Err, 5 chapters. I copy pasted and forgot to change the last one to a 5! DouglasA 19:53, 17 November 2009 (EST)

Douglas, that is absolutely spectacular!!! I don't know how to upload those to Conservapedia but I'm sure there must be a way. Let's see if others know.--Andy Schlafly 19:54, 17 November 2009 (EST)

Why not just provide a link to that download page? Or, we could always host the file ourselves using RapidShare or some other hosting site, and then link to that download? JacobB 20:01, 17 November 2009 (EST)

Jacob, whatever you think is best is fine with me. Thanks for your expertise!--Andy Schlafly 20:06, 17 November 2009 (EST)

If DouglasA would like me to host these files, I actually have my old computer set up specifically to share files - mostly old math texts, but I'd be more than happy to host PDFs of the CBP once they are completed. This seems like something DouglasA is interested in - Doug? JacobB 20:12, 17 November 2009 (EST)

Sounds great to me, if Douglas approves. Thanks much, Jacob!--Andy Schlafly 21:08, 17 November 2009 (EST)

Absolutely. Once completed and formatted, they'll be Conservapedia's property, not mine. DouglasA 21:46, 17 November 2009 (EST)

New Study Highlights Liberal Bias In Scientific Funding

[2]

Andy,

Thought you would want to see this, given that it fits so well with the discussions you've been having recently. The bias is really quite astounding--note how, between them, California, New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington receive as much funding as virtually all of the more conservative states COMBINED. --Benp 17:42, 18 November 2009 (EST)

I found this article intriguing (I'm don't mean to jump in uninvited, but...), and I wonder if political bias played a role in choosing which states received the most amount of stimulus funding for scientific research.

I did some digging into the stimulus funding received by the University of Washington, and it appears this money may have come with 'stings attached' since it is of course government grants, and Obama wants to see results before his presidency ends. Thus, on the one hand, Stimulus dollars will not offset cuts; on the other hand, with the $190 million that the college received, as UW Vice-Provost for Technology Transfer explained, "Federal law requires that the funds in question be used only for research. The money cannot be used to put more professors and teaching assistants into classrooms. None of this money will help alleviate the pain of students who cannot get the classes they need or of students denied admission for lack of room. [...] The federal stimulus research money must be spent within two years, putting pressure on researchers to produce results within that time. Our researchers cannot manufacture graduate students to carry out experiments in this time frame, nor does the UW have time to recruit new faculty members. This shortfall will be lead to 'competition for any loose postdocs and scientists out there.'"

Bottom line: the money won't be creating any new jobs, but it may help alleviate certain research projects that otherwise were postponed due to lack of funding. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. DerekE 18:22, 18 November 2009 (EST)

The correlation certainly seems obvious. We have a highly liberal Democrat administration, and the vast lion's share of the funding went to reliably Democratic states (and particularly liberal ones, at that.) --Benp 23:28, 18 November 2009 (EST)

While there's no denying that the more liberal states are the recipients of the most money from Obama's stimulus, I wonder if the correlation could be more closely tied with that of liberal states versus republican states. For instance, the more republican a state is, the less likely they are burdened by high taxes; thus, the "red state's" education system might not be hit as hard financially as those states which are very liberal. Take a look at California and Washington state, the state's taxes are so high it's at the point where the state government is receiving less money from tax revenue than if they were to become more conservative and lower taxes. Washington state has been slicing their education system apart by taking funds away from schools all across the state. Liberal states are heavily in debt - the first place to cut funding is the education system. Point being, I wonder if the red state's education systems are suffering as much as the liberal states are in terms of state funding. If they are, then it's more likely that Obama is being bias and sending more money to liberal states and playing political games with the stimulus. However, if liberal states are suffering more than red states, than I can see why more stimulus funding would end up in the worst hit education systems. Ironically, this doesn't solve the problem of taxes being too high, but it could shed more light into why some states received more money than others. DerekE 00:50, 20 November 2009 (EST)

Uh-oh... upon further review, the liberal bias of stimulus handouts looks to be more apparent. A report on states receiving stimulus funds says that, "According to Recovery.gov, the U.S. government’s official website for data related to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Oregon has a total of nine new congressional districts. That’s eight more than Oregon is projected to have after the 2010 census. The national stimulus has awarded Oregon $1,853,303,183, which, according to the government, has saved or created 9,653 jobs for Oregonians. These phantom districts have managed to create or save 15 jobs seemingly out of thin air. All it will cost taxpayers is $4.9 million dollars, or $326,624 per job."

I'm not yet sure if this has anything to do with the same education grants awarded to state school systems using stimulus funds, but it does back up the notion that liberal states are receiving more funds than republican states with the use of deceiving methods, one way or another. Also odd, the article mentioned that, "Ed Pound, the director of communications for the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, said there are no plans to correct these errors until the next reporting cycle." Wow... just wow. DerekE 15:05, 20 November 2009 (EST)

Name change

Hi Andy, it has been pointed out to me that my username does not match your preferred first name / initial format (I have my initials and surname), is it possible to change this? Thanks, Trond Eirik. TESvestad 17:51, 18 November 2009 (EST)

Sure. Would you like it to be TrondE?--Andy Schlafly 18:08, 18 November 2009 (EST)

That would be fine, thanks Andy. TESvestad 18:10, 18 November 2009 (EST)

Done as requested. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly 18:14, 18 November 2009 (EST)

Help with Exodus?

I'm having a bit of trouble with Exodus, specifically, the end of chapter 4 - I've read a few different translations of this part and I'm still not quite sure I grasp what's going on.

Also, regarding the use of the word slavery, it seems that if ever we were to use it, it would be here. The captivity of the Jews in Egypt seems very similar to the history of the term in America. Your thoughts? JacobB 21:16, 19 November 2009 (EST)

I'll take a look at that passage of Exodus. And I agree completely that the use of English term "slavery" applies appropriately to the captivity of Jewish people in Egypt. It's the New Testament use of "slavery" that I question. Had it been translated differently, could English-style slavery been avoided? It's a mind-boggling possibility.

Oh, by the way, the debate last night at Rutgers was intense. There was a reporter there ... and a former high-volume Conservapedia contributor! There is quite story to recount about this, but I'd like to await the reporter's account first. Perhaps he's writing for the school newspaper ....--Andy Schlafly 21:40, 19 November 2009 (EST)

I look forward to hearing about the Rutgers event! Your idea about slavery is a fascinating one. Have you ever read The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano? It's an autobiography of an African slave in Britain, and he brings up a similar idea at one point. If you ever get a chance to read it, I highly recommend it. It's the true story of a boy taken from Africa, who converts to Christianity, eventually works under an owner who eventually allows him to buy his freedom, and starts his own business in England, eventually becoming a millionaire. JacobB 22:00, 19 November 2009 (EST)