User talk:Aschlafly/Archive37

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Getting Ready

Ok I'm going to start and proceed forward. I've already compromised the primary subject of debate (how much points breaking news items should be worth) and I've told Learn Together that I'll try and wait as long as possible for a response from him, but we might have to go down and get another captain (although of course I reassured him that he could still join the contest as a non-captain if he happened to come back after we've asked someone else). I now plan on once again going to everyone's userpages and asking for final input, then this Friday depending on if Learn Together has come back or not the captains should probably plan on a schedule (obviously I can help). And then we can put a post on the main page telling everyone to sign up under a "Who's interested" section so that the captains can have a list to draft from. And Andy I still do need a response from you on that email - the time delay is only serving to increase my fears mentioned in the email; and obviously if you have any comments/critique of the contest point system or plan, I'd greatly appreciate it; thanks, --IDuan 16:55, 13 February 2008 (EST)

Ahh thanks for the response Andy - I was really worried there! (Would I say paranoid? Yes.) Just so you know I just sent you a response.--IDuan 21:20, 13 February 2008 (EST)

I swear - I didn't mean to do this, but it's worked out where I've had to for the last 3 times. I just sent you an email clearing up confusion about the address I gave you--IDuan 21:36, 13 February 2008 (EST)

Hi Andy,

I see there is a desire for another contest. I would recommend waiting for a month between contests so they keep their aura of being something 'out of the ordinary'. It looks like it will be about a month, but originally it seemed to be a bit close on the heels of the previous contest. Also, for some of us, we try to juggle our schedules to make as many contributions for Conservapedia as we can while the contest runs. If they are put too closely together, we lose that ability.

I remember you wished to have a rematch. Is that still the case? Either way it appears I am on the opposite team, although at some point I wouldn't mind us both piling up points for the same side. Hopefully this can happen in the future.

Peace to you,

Learn together 14:20, 15 February 2008 (EST)

A rematch would be awesome. A little more spacing between contests is welcome.--Aschlafly 00:06, 16 February 2008 (EST)

FYI...

user:HeywoodJa(etcetera) wasn't using his real name, true, but when sounded out, the name is also obscene. It's a joke from the Simpsons, but not so funny when the intent is to disrupt this site, as opposed to Moe's Tavern! I just thought I'd let you know; I've extended the block to infinite :-)-MexMax 21:21, 13 February 2008 (EST)

Also, I recently got an e-mail from "Aschlafly69@yahoo.com" - I'm sure it's not you, since it was kind of, errrr, off-message, but I thought you'd like to know.-MexMax 00:16, 14 February 2008 (EST)
Not me.--Aschlafly 00:05, 16 February 2008 (EST)

NIU

Andy - I just did Northern Illinois University - but it's only raw data that I found from a bit of resarch, and sadly I'm in a slight rush right now, so I can't really go back and edit everything - but given that more information is coming out pretty much by the second, would you mind either keeping it up to date or expanding on what's there? Thanks! (Oh and can you also link to the main page?) (Nevermind - I'll be here)

Oh - and also - I still need note about the contest!--IDuan 21:29, 14 February 2008 (EST)

Though I still need you to add a link on the main page to the article - sorry for the mix up; thanks again!--IDuan 21:48, 14 February 2008 (EST)

Thanks for doing all this! Just to let you know I just sent you an email concerning a non-CP related topic. Thanks,--IDuan 00:01, 15 February 2008 (EST)

What happpened?

What happened? Something weird went down on my talk page? MetcalfeM

Someone vandalized your page, and then it was reverted. MetcalfeM - rather than signing your post with just a link to your userpage, sign them using ~~~~ - that'll put a link to your userpage and a timestamp.--IDuan 00:17, 15 February 2008 (EST)

Thanks for the tip dude MetcalfeM 00:20, 15 February 2008 (EST)

Hollywood Values and Point 1 of EoBoW

Hang on, I have an idea!!! TheGuy 20:37, 15 February 2008 (EST)

This:
'The concept of Hollywood values refers to the moral bankruptcy and spiritual weakness seen in celebrities who are commonly associated with Hollywood. The perversions undertaken by these people include[1]:
  • Drug use
  • Promiscuity
  • Disrespect of religion
  • Seditious speech towards America, including blind opposition to the Iraq War
  • Glorification of violence
Hollywood values have a number of negative impacts, both on celebrities and those who idolise them. One notable example is the death of Heath Ledger from a lethal cocktail of drugs taken as a result of the party lifestyle he enjoyed. Other examples include sexual indiscretion and drug use amongst teens.
Many people identify Hollywood values as being "out of touch" with the values of broader society [2].
:
  1. Hollywood and social values
  2. MSNBC: Hollywood values out of touch, poll says
Now appears here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_values. Let's see how long it stays. TheGuy 20:48, 15 February 2008 (EST)
Superb work! Please put some of your great stuff in our entry on Hollywood Values also, where they will stay. In contrast, let's watch how quickly your insights are deleted by the liberals at Wikipedia.--Aschlafly 21:19, 15 February 2008 (EST)
Ha ha ha: it's already been noticed for deletion on Wikipedia!!! Wow, that occurred even quicker than I expected!--Aschlafly 21:20, 15 February 2008 (EST)
Hehe Not unsurprising, given that it was our old sparring partner AmesG who tagged it. Anything said here, he cannot accept. Classic Conservaphobia :D 10px Fox (talk|contribs) 21:24, 15 February 2008 (EST)
Ah, those liberals: free speech for absolutely anything and everything ... except the conservative truth. The liberals will work overtime to censor the conservative truth and prevent others from hearing it.--Aschlafly 21:27, 15 February 2008 (EST)

Reason and faith

Did you know that Oxford University is the "Jerusalem of atheism"? (See Richard Dawkins.) --Ed Poor Talk 09:14, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Wow, that's offensive and preposterous.--Aschlafly 09:18, 16 February 2008 (EST)
Mr. Schlafly, I agree with your sentiments, unfortunately that is one of the consequences of living in a democratic society. We all have to put up with a lot of things that we don't really like but use the democratic process to try and change things. However, I thought Ed's edit summary was a bit snide as it seemed to take a pot-shot at we Europeans. Conservative Christians over here are just as annoyed at these evangelical atheists as you are in America although we may be less numerous, so please don't lump us all in the same basket. BrianCo 12:34, 16 February 2008 (EST)
You make a valid point. It's a close call. I didn't interpret Ed's substantive edit as a potshot at Europeans, and I see that Fox has changed it so I think you're concerns are satisfied.--Aschlafly 13:01, 16 February 2008 (EST)

What to do about the contest

Andy - I'm planning on advancing with the Contest - is that ok?--IDuan 14:13, 16 February 2008 (EST)

I'm excited about it, but it seemed that Learn Together wanted to wait a bit. I'm fine with starting tonight.--Aschlafly 14:59, 16 February 2008 (EST)
OH did he? Learn Together hadn't responded to my comments on his talk page so I had no idea he was even around! Last time people had a few complaints about not being drafted before they started - so we should probably do a draft first before we start - like why don't we try and do the draft sometime this week (you and either Learn Together or someone else if Learn Together doesn't have time could even start and finish tomorrow) and then one or two days after the draft we can start the contest (a Monday or Wednesday would probably be best). What do you think?--IDuan 15:34, 16 February 2008 (EST)
Maybe a one or two-day contest starting tonight, with fewer members? Perhaps shorter contests with fewer players would be a fun change of pace.--Aschlafly 15:39, 16 February 2008 (EST)
Hmm, interesting thought. Although I think we might have to work out the specifics between now and the start time. For example, do you want teams? If so how do we manage informing everyone about a draft, and then drafting? (Maybe if we put a note on the main page we could get the info out.) How many players per team? When choosing between one and two days - I think you have to go with two, a one day contest will just be too short of a time (in fact, even two might be pushing it - because really a contest that only last a short while isn't really worth all the work that has to go in to it). What about judges? And do we make any changes to the rule system based off this? Just to let you know, if you don't want to waste your talk page space panning out the details, I have to eat dinner soon, but before and after dinner I'll be able to quickly respond to emails. I'm pretty excited - nervous, but excited!--IDuan 17:53, 16 February 2008 (EST)
Lol, Andy I hate to rush you, but I think if we want to start this at midnight then we have to move quickly--IDuan 19:29, 16 February 2008 (EST)
Can we get a sense for who is interested? I can captain one team, and perhaps you can captain the other.--Aschlafly 19:35, 16 February 2008 (EST)
Ok I'm good with that - seeing as this is a short contest there's not a real need for formality. I'll set up a who's interested thing on the contest 5 - so users can put there names down if they want to participate. Can you put a note telling them to do that on the main page? Thanks!--IDuan 19:49, 16 February 2008 (EST)
I'm done with my part--IDuan 20:28, 16 February 2008 (EST)
Is there a contest page entry that you set up? I don't see a link ...--Aschlafly 20:44, 16 February 2008 (EST)
I was thinking we would just use the ol' Contest5 link - I mean, it is the 5th Contest after-all. And hey, we can use this short contest as a trial run for what will now be the 6th contest's scoring system.--IDuan 20:46, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Captain

Andy, I feel for you, I really do. What are you, 0 and 6 in Contests? Look, frankly if the situation wasn't the way it was, I'd hope for you to win this contest, but I'm afraid I can't let that happen - so I'm going to have to suggest you listen to the Democrats who are advising you to go ahead and forfeit; maybe next time, man.--IDuan 21:00, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Ha ha ha. My losing record makes me try harder!--Aschlafly 21:24, 16 February 2008 (EST)
Hmm - ok, but if you start losing the Democrats will only say "get out" louder (and if you start winning they'll also say you should get out louder). ;D So not many people are signing up yet - do you think we should hold off the start till tomorrow (personally I'd LIKE to start tonight - but I'm not sure if we can)--IDuan 21:38, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Yeah, let's start the contest tomorrow night - we'll draft during the day time - we just tried to start it too quickly--IDuan 23:51, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Sounds great!--Aschlafly 23:52, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Andy - you should update the main page to say that only one more spot is really open - so people should hurry up and sign up now!--IDuan 01:00, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Bolding

Hey Andy, sorry about removing the bolding - I was looking at the edit view and I wasn't sure what the intent of the link was, but nonetheless - if it is bolding, then it's best to use the three single quotes - because that's what their purpose is fore.--IDuan 21:52, 16 February 2008 (EST)

OK, thanks.--Aschlafly 21:59, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Abstract?

Wait - or insight? I think you're making the scoring table too abstract - we're going to run into conflicts. And no, we can't award 20 points for a sentence of insight, and we also should definitely not encourage editors to just edit popular pages. I'll keep the insight thing in - but we have to require references for that.--IDuan 12:34, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Actually never mind - it's your call on how the contest is run - but I'm going to have to drop out - the new format complicates things completely (one team makes an article and then the other team edits it? What about edit conflicts? Andy why limit what people can edit?), and the new scoring system allows for users who don't really do anything (like: add one sentence that they thing adds insight) to claim points - and that's not adding any value - especially if its unsighted. I'm going to go ahead and drop out - but I'll certainly be back for the next longer contest with the normal rules.--IDuan 12:41, 17 February 2008 (EST)
I agree that the points for insight may be a little difficult to enforce, but the idea a good one, and worth trying . This contest will be very interesting. ~ SharonTalk 12:56, 17 February 2008 (EST)
P.S. - Fox was very successful in the last contest, and is a good candidate for captain if Iduan is out. ~ SharonTalk 12:58, 17 February 2008 (EST)
I agree with Sharon. I like this variation of the contest. --Crocoite 13:11, 17 February 2008 (EST)
It's worth a try. Fox is supposed to pick a teammate now. If he doesn't pick soon, then either Sharon or Crocoite should just join his team, and then I'll pick someone.--Aschlafly 13:14, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Reply to Iduan above: It's fine if you want to skip this. The rule changes are simply an attempt to tap into the enlightening aspects of our system. We do not simply repeat information here, but we also provide insights. We're more than a dictionary or reference manual. We are a provider of truth, particularly truth censored by liberals, and sometimes that requires going beyond simply cutting and pasting from liberal sources.--Aschlafly 13:28, 17 February 2008 (EST)

I would rather not skip - but the problem is you're allowing users to put in one sentence without a reference and then claim 20 points because they think it adds insight. I mean, putting in one sentence that adds unknown insight is no where near as important as putting in two to three sentences of factual information that are well referenced. I mean, if you would be ok with using this poitn system [1] (which has the insight stuff, but requires quality insight to be referenced and ordinary insight to not be referenced and also doesn't punish users for improving unknown articles) then I'd be more than happy to join; but with the current scoring system it'll just be a fluke - the team that will win is the team that will be able to complement themselves more.--IDuan 13:33, 17 February 2008 (EST)
And also Andy - the way you went about changing everything was kind of sudden, I mean, do you remember when I changed up stuff? I let everyone know and we discussed it for a while before it was actually used - here you changed everything even more dramatically then me - and you did it the day of the contest!--IDuan 13:34, 17 February 2008 (EST)
Iduan, my proposed changes are consistent with what I was saying yesterday: let's focus on quality. I posted the changes this morning for comment but you did not start editing until this afternoon. That's fine, but you were the one who was late. The changes are hardly so drastic as to cause you to quit. But, as I said, if you've prefer not to compete this time, that's fine. If you'd like to join, I'd love to have you on my team.--Aschlafly 13:48, 17 February 2008 (EST)
I'm not crystal clear on exactly how the scoring and rules work, but I will read them a few more times now that I've been shanghai'd to captain :D Iduan, apply the military adage of Adapt-Improvise-Overcome, and I'm sure you - and all of us partaking - will have a few days of fun. 10px Fox (talk|contribs) 14:00, 17 February 2008 (EST)
User:Fox, please feel free to improve the rules as you read them! Compared to prior contests, there is more reward for quality and insight rather than simply copying or rewording.--Aschlafly 14:06, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Andy that point system doesn't focus on quality though - it just focuses on points. Adding one sentence that provides "insight" and not even referencing that is not equivalent to adding multiple sentences that introduce information and are well referenced, but you're equating them. I'm fine with the insight sentence getting 20 points - but only if its referenced, because otherwise this contest outcome will just be a fluke. And wait a second - as far as me being late goes - again, how long did I say users should have to comment on the rules last time? At least a week, you gave me a few hours.--IDuan 14:12, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Again, I suggest you simply look at the link I sent you - because all that does is
  1. Say a reference is required for quality insight (but not ordinary insight)
  2. Focus on quality edits rather than users trying to get points by only editing popular articles--IDuan 14:14, 17 February 2008 (EST)
Iduan, it was your suggestion, and it was a good one, to have the contest soon. Just last night the format, with a shorter time period and smaller teams, was settled. The format continued to improve this morning with more of a sports-like format, with one side's actions affecting the other side's options.
You agreed to the focus on quality, I thought. The proposed rules have been up for many hours, and just now you're making your first suggestion. It's OK for you to be many hours late, but I don't know why you're complaining about something caused by your own tardiness.
As to the reference issue, I think that can be easily handled by saying "preferably referenced" and leaving the final decision to the judges.--Aschlafly 14:17, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Again, I opened up the changes for discussing for about a week - 24*7=168 hours. You made changes and expected a response withing ... what, 8 hours? Excuse me for thinking that you wouldn't decide to revamp the entire point system that had been based of a lot of discussion right before the contest started.

I thought you were committed to focusing on quality - not just allowing users to claim points by saying "this added insight, it's one sentence; unreferenced - 20 points" (again: the quality of one unreferenced sentence adding insight is not the same as the quality of multiple, well referenced statements) . And the judges won't be able to detract points because there's no way they can go through each edit and decide whether it added insight and whether it should've had a reference or not.

Saying that quality insights require a reference and saying that ordinary insights do not is the only way to allow for accuracy and quality.--IDuan 14:24, 17 February 2008 (EST)

That sounds like a reasonable compromise to me. ~ SharonTalk 14:26, 17 February 2008 (EST)
Haha, thank you Sharon :D --IDuan 14:26, 17 February 2008 (EST)
Andy, I'm happy with the rules as I read them, and I'm in agreement with any approach which will cause players to exercise their brains a little more than their fingers :) The longer contests with more players do tend to encourage a little gaming of the system - hence the mad 100 yard dash I always produce with 200 categories added or similar *winks* But I'm all for quality over quantity, and this sits well with my belief in and support for CP. As I said to you when I first came here, I'm 100% behind the project and its goal of producing an online resource that homeschooling parents like myself can turn to, knowing we won't be exposing our children to the cruft, pornography and atheistic agenda of WP. Iduan, I can see the position you're taking, but, well, fire up the neurons and give it a shot anyway. Even if we find that the system this time had a few flaws, we can at least say that we tested it and we took part, and we can evaluate afterwards. Learning is a curve, and life is a marathon :) 10px Fox (talk|contribs) 14:29, 17 February 2008 (EST)
Fox, I'm not suggesting that we should revert all the way back to how the Contest was before. I agree that we should reward insight. However, I do think that for quality, a sentenced deemed "quality insight" should require a reference, and a sentence without a reference should be ordinary insight (which you still get 8 points for).--IDuan 14:32, 17 February 2008 (EST)
OK, Iduan's suggested improvement is a good one and we can begin shortly. I'm sure the rules will be improved further in the future. Let's complete the picking of teammates and begin! Iduan, I'll check the contest page to see if you're back in.--Aschlafly 14:33, 17 February 2008 (EST)
Alright, i'll add myself and make the change (ok?)--IDuan 14:35, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Thats great, Iduan. I'm glad we managed to work out this disagreement, and look forward to a great contest! ~ SharonTalk 14:38, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Great work, Iduan. We really tapped into the power of this system to resolve this dispute. Please change the rules and join my team.--Aschlafly 14:41, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Sounds good - and thanks for being so understanding of my worries. Oh ... i'm on your team? Looks like the losing streak may end afterall :D--IDuan 14:42, 17 February 2008 (EST)

I don't mind reverting and you resuming the helm on team A. 10px Fox (talk|contribs) 14:46, 17 February 2008 (EST)
;)--IDuan 14:51, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Starting

So how/when are we going to start the contest? And will each player on the team that wins the coin toss write an article - or just one?--IDuan 14:51, 17 February 2008 (EST)

I vote that each player should write a starting article. This will give us a little more material to work with, and will help the contest start more quickly, because the team will not have to agree on a single article to write. ~ SharonTalk 14:55, 17 February 2008 (EST)

I'm really good with anything - although here's an idea: in order to ensure we have the most material to work with - why don't we split up the contest? 1 day of team 1 creating an article and then team 2 editing it (and vice versa), and then one day of normal edits. I don't really care if we do it like this or not, I just want to make sure we have a system in place.--IDuan 14:58, 17 February 2008 (EST)

This all sounds good to me. Today we can all write a new entry if you like. We can extend the contest as needed. Let's begin: 3 versus 3, as we originally planned!--Aschlafly 15:07, 17 February 2008 (EST)
Haha, I'm slightly confused - so do we just edit as normal?--IDuan 15:12, 17 February 2008 (EST)
I think it would be good to stay with the "sports contest" rules throughout the contest. We can organize a contest of regular editing sometime in the near future. These new rules need to be tested over a few days, to see how they might function in a full-fledged contest. These rules will increase the teamwork in this contest, and will create more direct interaction between the teams. ~ SharonTalk 15:16, 17 February 2008 (EST)
I'm fine doing that - I'm just not sure I get them ... - do we just edit as normal? Like I just did an edit to LSU, does that count?--IDuan 15:17, 17 February 2008 (EST)
My understanding is that the contest would start with a "kickoff", which would consist of one or both sides presenting one or more entries to the other side. Each team should develop one or more *new* entries for the "kickoff", and then editing must proceed from the one or more entries received by the other side. Once we see the line-up of new entries created for this, then we can decide how many to put "in play". So I'm going to develop a new entry now, but let's not feel rushed or pressured by this. Let's have a contest format that encourages insights.--Aschlafly 15:23, 17 February 2008 (EST)
That sounds good. I think that once each side has their lineup of entries, the teams would score points by editing the other teams work, and the pages linked from those entries. Perhaps we could also score points by editing the entries and links of our teammates, to foster a competitive spirit within the teams. ~ SharonTalk 15:27, 17 February 2008 (EST)

(Edit conflict) Thanks for the response Andy, I'll just start creating entries and follow your lead.--IDuan 15:28, 17 February 2008 (EST)

I'll start my new entry now. ~ SharonTalk 15:29, 17 February 2008 (EST)
Excellent! Let the game begin! (We can extend the end of the game so we don't feel rushed.)--Aschlafly 15:29, 17 February 2008 (EST)
I'm confused. I thought everyone was supposed to create a "kickoff entry", and then we would edit those entries, and their links, and the links of their links, etc. Iduan appears to be editing normally already, and does not have a kickoff entry. Did I miss something? ~ SharonTalk 16:52, 17 February 2008 (EST)
You're right, until we have the "kick-off", no points count. I just completed my new entry, Roberta McCain. I'll review yours now.--Aschlafly 17:08, 17 February 2008 (EST)
Oh sorry, my mistake - I thought we were allowed to do multiple kick off entries; question though - does our kickoff entry itself count for points?--IDuan 17:15, 17 February 2008 (EST)
Multiple new entries by each team. Pick your best new entry from those you created, and let's make a "kickoff" category on Conservapedia:Contest5. Mine is Roberta McCain.--Aschlafly 17:16, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Mine's Johns Hopkins University. But wait, sorry can I just have an explanation of what I'm supposed to do now? Andy do I edit your article? Do I edit Sharon's? --IDuan 17:18, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Good question! I was under the impression that each player would put down their best article under the "kickoff" section on the Contest page, and everyone would play using those articles, regardless of who created them. Does anyone disagree? ~ SharonTalk 17:21, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Ok, sounds good.--IDuan 17:23, 17 February 2008 (EST)

So

Just to make sure, am I doing everything ok?--IDuan 17:45, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Everything looks fine to me. Let me know if you see me doing anything wrong. I think I understand the rules, but one can never be sure. ~ SharonTalk 17:50, 17 February 2008 (EST)
Looks good. Already I've learned something by editing someone else's entry. This is a much better way to run a contest, I think: encourage participants to edit the other side's entries.--Aschlafly 17:56, 17 February 2008 (EST)
I like this system very much. It makes the contestants slow down, and clean up each other's entries. This results in much higher quality work. ~ SharonTalk 17:58, 17 February 2008 (EST)

I'm in the middle right now - I'm still not 100% what the rules are. Like, for example, what if you make edits to a non-kick off page - do those edits count?--IDuan 18:00, 17 February 2008 (EST)

I think edits count if they are to a kick-off page, or one of the links from a kick-off page (or one of the links from the links of the kick-off page, etc.). That sound confusing...oh well. ~ SharonTalk 18:02, 17 February 2008 (EST)
Lol, ok, I think I get it. The last question I have is ... what about templates?--IDuan 18:03, 17 February 2008 (EST)
Right. Points are only earned in connection with the entries "in play", starting with the kickoff entries and expanding to anything they link to, and then anything those links link to, etc. We're just imitating how a basketball or football or soccer game works. Templates only count if they fit into the game.--Aschlafly 18:04, 17 February 2008 (EST)
Alright I think I get what you're saying - at least for the most part. Thanks--IDuan 18:06, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Andy - the contest ends at midnight, right?--IDuan 19:55, 18 February 2008 (EST)

Please check with Sharon. I'm fine with that deadline.--Aschlafly 20:05, 18 February 2008 (EST)
Midnight tonight is alright with me, but it seems like the contest is still very productive. Perhaps we should extend the competition until midnight Wednesday, and allow the improvements to continue. ~ SharonTalk 20:10, 18 February 2008 (EST)
I was under the impression that it was meant to run longer than a day... 10px Fox (talk|contribs) 20:12, 18 February 2008 (EST)
I agree. I'm really enjoying this new format. Let's set the deadline for Wednesday night.--Aschlafly 20:19, 18 February 2008 (EST)

Judge

I would like to be a judge in Contest5. Is that alright with you? Thanks! :P ~BCSTalk2ME 16:45, 17 February 2008 (EST)

That would be great! It should be more fun this time due to the different rules.--Aschlafly 16:47, 17 February 2008 (EST)
Agreed! Thanks! :P ~BCSTalk2ME 16:48, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Penance

Andy, I have written Ann Widdecombe as penance for my block yesterday. I'll try harder to understand what counts as Liberal logic. -- Ferret Nice old chat 06:39, 18 February 2008 (EST)

Homework

I was just wondering if you could post the writing homework... I seem to have misplaced mine. Thanks! --Chris 11:03, 18 February 2008 (EST)

Will do right now. Thanks for the suggestion.--Aschlafly 11:14, 18 February 2008 (EST)

BIAS!

I was researching for the Cobb County essay, and i stumbled onto the wikipedia page on it... it was an absolute joke! i tried to clean it up a bit, but they're probably gonna revert. you should add it to the bias page. --Chris 15:52, 18 February 2008 (EST)

Will do. Great catch!--Aschlafly 16:01, 18 February 2008 (EST)

Sorry

Didn't know so-called "stubs" weren't allowed. -danq 17:10, 18 February 2008 (EST)

Obviously we don't want a string of junk. It is not really necessary to state that in the rules, is it?--Aschlafly 17:14, 18 February 2008 (EST)
Which of the articles I did were "junk?" I added info on the PMRC, and created articles so that no links in the PMRC article (or the articles I added) would be empty. The "Psychosis" and "Bipolar disorder" articles also had empty links. -danq 17:18, 18 February 2008 (EST)
What do you call this: Twisted_Sister? We're not Wikipedia here.--Aschlafly 18:01, 18 February 2008 (EST)

Anymore

Are there anymore pages like Rule 45 that might need a layout fix? -^_^- Fuzzy 19:58, 19 February 2008 (EST)

Nice work! Yes, there are some others. I'll try to find them and let you know. Can you fix the last line in Rule 45 also?--Aschlafly 21:10, 19 February 2008 (EST)
Thank you. The line has been fixed. -^_^- Fuzzy 21:15, 19 February 2008 (EST)
I have to figure out how you do that. Here's another one: Rule 26.--Aschlafly 21:19, 19 February 2008 (EST)
It's not that difficult, just time consuming. It also requires <br /> spamming. -^_^- Fuzzy 21:26, 19 February 2008 (EST)
Found another one a while ago. I'll look for more tomorrow. G'night. -^_^- Fuzzy 23:42, 19 February 2008 (EST)
Thanks much!--Aschlafly 23:44, 19 February 2008 (EST)
Actually, you can block HHSFake and Liberal9188 because, well, I don't need them. Those usernames are just giving me more of a reason to edit while during lecture time at school. -^_^- Fuzzy 22:23, 21 February 2008 (EST)
You learn more here than in school!--Aschlafly 22:50, 21 February 2008 (EST)
Unfortunately, not about my major I don't. At least, not when I click "Random Page". -^_^- Fuzzy 23:10, 21 February 2008 (EST)
For me, the best learning is by writing and explaining rather than simply reading. I suspect that is true for many people. So how about writing about topics in your major?--Aschlafly 23:28, 21 February 2008 (EST)
I wouldn't be able to do justice, especially since for my Telecommunications course I just mindlessly read the text, answer the questions, and hope I do well. -^_^- Fuzzy 23:34, 21 February 2008 (EST)

Update

Uhoh Andy, due to a massive amount of school work I'm not going to be able to do much at all over the next two days - you and Joaquin are going to have to hold up the fort! (maybe I can get a few entries in late tonight or tomorrow :D)--IDuan 20:52, 19 February 2008 (EST)

Oh no! We have much catching up to do!--Aschlafly 21:09, 19 February 2008 (EST)
Haha yeah we're pretty far behind - but hey, I believe. Though if we lose - I blame you - I told you we should've ended it yesterday!!!! lol! :D--IDuan 22:54, 19 February 2008 (EST)

Ahw Andy - you might pull us back into this! I just took a quick look at your contest page, and while I'm no economist - I'm pretty sure when you add that up you'll have more than 33. ;D--IDuan 23:28, 19 February 2008 (EST)

Haha

I see you have a pretty big workload (finding out what your score is) - do you want me to do a day or two for you?--IDuan 20:01, 20 February 2008 (EST)

Sure, that would be great. But make sure you include some bonus points for "top 20" entries, and also for insights.--Aschlafly 20:07, 20 February 2008 (EST)
Haha, will do - I'll bold the one's where I might be giving you too many/few points (in other words: if there's a question; then i'll bold).--IDuan 20:13, 20 February 2008 (EST)
We may have to call in the judge and cry "foul" if we don't see some scores soon :D How can my team know what they need to aim at? 10px Fox (talk|contribs) 20:15, 20 February 2008 (EST)
We can't keep up with you Fox! You're breaking all the records this time. Given a choice between editing and counting, I've had to edit to try to score whatever points I can!--Aschlafly 20:23, 20 February 2008 (EST)
(Note for next time: We need to make it so that quality articles get a lot more points - because right now, one quality edit to a top 20 (which only involves getting 1 reference and writing two sentences) is the same number of points as writing 2 paragraphs and getting at least 3 references - let's make quality articles worth 30 points for next time) --IDuan 20:37, 20 February 2008 (EST)

Ok, I'm going to take a little break, and actually fix the style in Rule 45--IDuan 20:57, 20 February 2008 (EST)

Done - with both that and your score chart. And just to let you know, if you made multiple edits to an entry, I just combined those edits and rated them based off the combo (so say you did two minor edits to the same page, that combined were an ordinary edit - i gave you credit for that (conversely if you did 2 minor edits to the same page that combined were still just a minor edit, I just gave you points for one minor edit))--IDuan 21:14, 20 February 2008 (EST)
Thanks!--Aschlafly 21:18, 20 February 2008 (EST)
No problem ;D Although we're going to have to really hope Joaquin's points add up - we're losing big! Hey, if you're around, can you delete YGGR? Thanks (and just fyi, i'll be back in a bit)--IDuan 21:42, 20 February 2008 (EST)

Hollywood Values

I strongly protest your reversion of my edits and the tone of your 'warning'. Both items were perfectly legitimate and in line with other entries. Moon was drummer for 'The Who' and lived a notoriously dissolute life. He was a druggie and an alcoholic, and his death at the early age of 32 was brought about by an overdose of medication for his alcoholism. He is as much 'Hollywood' as Phil Lynott or Sid Vicious. Davidson was a vicar who went to the bad: he enjoyed the 'fast life' in London, and consorted with prostitutes, ostensibly to 'save' them. Having been defrocked (removed from the Anglican ministry), he turned himself into a one-man freak show, touring seaside resorts. As a publicity stunt in Skegness, he sat in a cage with a circus lion, which proceeded to attack and eat him. If he wasn't ruined by Hollywood values - and, as you point out, geographical propinquity is not the essence here, then who is? I trust you will reconsider your hasty decision. Sawneybeane 17:53, 20 February 2008 (EST)

Your Moon item may be fine, and I did not mean to revert that (the software does it automatically). The Davidson item from over 70 years ago is absurd and has absolutely nothing to with Hollywood or Hollywood values.--Aschlafly 18:01, 20 February 2008 (EST)
I disagree entirely. When, in your opinion, did Hollywood values - briefly defined as decadence associated with celebrity - begin? And it was you (iirc) who stated that location is not important - if it is, you could ditch half that list. I added Virginia Rappe - a prime example of HV, and earlier than Davidson. Just because Davidson died in a somewhat unusual fashion does not lessen the role of HV in his demise. Now think on! Sawneybeane 18:05, 20 February 2008 (EST)
I wish a lion would eat you. Sawneybeane 07:24, 21 February 2008 (EST)

End

Andy, I just added a note about the final steps of the competition - basically it just says what we went over before the competition. You might want to check it over, just to make sure. I'm going to start calculating Joaquin's points.--IDuan 23:40, 20 February 2008 (EST)

(I kind of think the Masterpieces should be worth more since there's such a big deal - why don't we say 400? Meh) Anyways, since your team captain you should probably be the one to nominate the three "masterpiece contestants". Just so you know my top 3 are: Johns Hopkins University, Howard University and University of Arizona - and I guess you can just compare those to what you and Joaquin consider your top articles (I know Joaquin considers Allan Rohan Crite his) - and then pick the best--IDuan 23:49, 20 February 2008 (EST)
Iduan, I slipped in two or three more edits before the deadline. We can wrap up the counting tomorrow.--Aschlafly 00:01, 21 February 2008 (EST)
Excellent - well, just so you know then, all that has to happen tomorrow then is: 1) you finish adding your score; 2) each team picks its top three articles; 3) the judge picks the top 3 of those articles; 4) 400 points is awarded per article. Have a great night;--IDuan 00:19, 21 February 2008 (EST)
Just to let you know, I'm online now, so if you want my input or anything in deciding what our 4 masterpiece articles should be, then I'm happy to help--IDuan 15:24, 21 February 2008 (EST)
Should we make a tentative list on the contest page and then choose the best?--Aschlafly 17:41, 21 February 2008 (EST)
Wow, sorry I'm so late, unfortunately I'm getting sick & I had to sleep for a while. The tentative list sounds good to me--IDuan 19:51, 21 February 2008 (EST)

Ok, I just threw a bunch together - we should probably limit the number we submit to 4-5. Feel free to add anything you think I missed - my search was pretty light.--IDuan 19:59, 21 February 2008 (EST)

Post-contest

Well done for giving us a good run for our money, Andy! You certainly picked some great editors for your team, and win or lose, from my POV it was definitely a worthwhile endeavour. 10px Fox (talk|contribs) 06:58, 21 February 2008 (EST)

This was a great way of playing which I really enjoyed. I think this contest benefited the site immensely and kept the editors focused and productive. ~ SharonTalk 07:24, 21 February 2008 (EST)

I wish the contest was still on. I just created B-1B Lancer which I could improve and nominate for a Masterpiece entry. --Crocoite 22:47, 22 February 2008 (EST)

Wow, it is a masterpiece!!!!--Aschlafly 23:58, 22 February 2008 (EST)

Question

Hi. I would like to help with the upkeep of this site. I have some experience in the mediawiki software and would love to help update the site and the interface. Let me know if I can help. Wahrheit (talk) 16:43, 22 February 2008 (EST)

Sure, we welcome help. Feel free to contribute to the entries and let's proceed from there.--Aschlafly 17:09, 22 February 2008 (EST)
Rather, I mean on a developer/technical level :). Wahrheit (talk) 20:06, 22 February 2008 (EST)

Question

Mr.Schlafly:

Recent actions directed towards me have prompted this inquiry.

Recently I was blocked for a week because I reverted one of your contributions. The person that did the block stated there was a rule that prohibited any one from editing your edits. Evidently this is an unwritten rule because I was unable to find any such commandment or guideline that prohibited this activity. I'd like to know if this unwritten rule is true.

I was also told that lowly editors like myself are not allowed to make a decision concerning a violation of the commandments or guidelines despite this line on the commandment page, "These guidelines are kept simple in order to avoid the arbitrary and biased enforcement…". I'd like to think a person with at least an average comprehension level should be able to assist the administrators with identifying when an entry has violated Conservapedia guidelines. This appears to be another unwritten rule, is it also true?

And speaking of arbitrary and biased enforcement, it appears that many articles written by the leadership of this encyclopedia routinely violate commandment #2, and to a lesser extent #5, even though this is a common criticism aimed at Wikipedia. Since the leadership seems to treat commandment #2 with contempt, are the lowly editors allowed to do the same?

Thank-you for your time.--Jimmy 19:57, 22 February 2008 (EST)

Jimmy, I don't have time to sort through your general complaints. A look at your contributions shows that most of them have been talk, talk, talk, and that you've edited only a few liberal-type entries, like ACLU and public schools. I did revert your edit to ACLU because it made it appear like the ACLU defends Christians exercising free speech. The vast majority of ACLU efforts are in promotion of obscenity as free speech, and against anything Christian. Our entries reflect the truth, not misleading exceptions.
Improve this encyclopedia and you'll be praised, not blocked. Push misleading liberal distortions and your work will be reverted. Godspeed.--Aschlafly 20:59, 22 February 2008 (EST)
I asked some very straight forward and simple questions that require a simple yes or no answer. Answering these questions would benefit myself and others, I don't think I'm asking a lot. My very first edit was on a talk page and you thanked me even though another sysop gave me a hard time about it on my talk page because he couldn't be bothered to read 20 words. Most of the talk page entries have been about improving this encyclopedia, i.e. asking people for references to their edits and assertions. Isn't making such requests all about improving this encyclopedia?
I have made edits to many more articles other than the ACLU and public school articles so I don't appreciate how you are understating my contributions. Some of my other edits were reverted without explanation and other articles are protected so my only recourse is to use the talk pages.
I have been blocked twice so far, the first was because I was accused of a copy and paste from a hate site. Even though it was admitted my reference wasn't a hate site, I was still blocked even though the edit I wrote wasn't copied; it was an edited version of a very small portion of the site. My second block was because of an alleged violation of an unwritten rule about editing your contributions. Hence my request about the unwritten rules.
I could make many more contributions yet I hesitate to do so because of the 'unwritten rule' threat.
Any chance you could provide a reference to your assertion that 'The vast majority of ACLU efforts are in promotion of obscenity as free speech, and against anything Christian?" --Jimmy 22:13, 22 February 2008 (EST)
Jimmy, you spend too much time talking. Your edits could be more substantive, and with less bias. Research ACLU in articles and you'll see where the bulk of its efforts are. I'm not going to spend all evening responding to your talk, talk, talk, and you will be blocked if you continue it. See our rules.--Aschlafly 22:24, 22 February 2008 (EST)
My talking has not violated the 90/10 rule and an immediate direct answer to my questions would have avoided all of this back and forth talk. Since you referenced the written rules and did not confirm the existence of unwritten rules, I'll just assume the unwritten rules do not exist.
I have researched the ACLU and my conclusion is the opposite of yours, the bulk of their efforts do not support obscenity or pornography and they spend a lot of time and effort defending the religious rights of Christians. Thanks for your response, I won't bother you about this matter again.--Jimmy 23:35, 22 February 2008 (EST)


Concern..

Are you really trying to levitate? o_O Fuzzy 20:56, 22 February 2008 (EST)

Ha ha ha.--Aschlafly 20:59, 22 February 2008 (EST)
Should I take that as a yes? O_o Fuzzy 21:00, 22 February 2008 (EST)
No, not literally.--Aschlafly 21:01, 22 February 2008 (EST)
Just joking around to liven up the household? -^_^- Fuzzy 21:04, 22 February 2008 (EST)

Conservative Colleges

Hey Andy - I just created Southern Methodist University - which will be the location of the George W. Bush library (fun trivia fact) - and I just thought, maybe I should add that to Conservative colleges - given that it will be the location and because Laura Bush is an alumni, it would seem that the school is conservative, however I was wondering if you knew anything that would suggest otherwise, I'd like to be as certain as possible before adding it to the list. Thanks, --IDuan 21:21, 22 February 2008 (EST)

I don't think SMU is conservative anymore, but I have an open mind about this.--Aschlafly 21:58, 22 February 2008 (EST)
I actually have no idea myself, I hadn't even heard of it until yesterday when the library thing was announced, however, I did find that bishops and faculty opposed the Iraq War (and the Bush library) - so that probably indicates you are correct - although I'm not sure what percentage they're talking about, but I'll leave it up to your discretion.--IDuan 22:01, 22 February 2008 (EST)

Question

Could you give me upload and edit rights? I'd like to upload a graph I'm working on. Wahrheit (talk) 12:59, 23 February 2008 (EST)

A few to delete

Andy, would you mind deleting: Phi Tau (again - the user recreated it), The Ledyard Chellenge and The Dartmouth Seven? Thanks, --IDuan 16:03, 23 February 2008 (EST)

Thanks--IDuan 16:40, 23 February 2008 (EST)

Sysop Article

Mr. Schlafly: I'm doing an article on Conservapedia for my school newspaper (I did a similar article on Wikipedia for our last issue). As part of the article, I'm trying to find out what percentage of sysops have retired. Could you verify the list on my userpage? Thanks,--Smallguy 19:21, 23 February 2008 (EST)

You lost me. I don't think any Sysops have "retired". I can't recall a single Sysop resigning or voluntarily giving up his or her privileges.--Aschlafly 19:31, 23 February 2008 (EST)
He means "became inactive". At Wikipedia, the tradition is that inactive admins retain their admin rights - even after years of inactivity. --Ed Poor Talk 19:36, 23 February 2008 (EST)
Yes, thank you Mr. Poor. I'm attempting to discover how many former sysops have seemingly left, by voluntary means or otherwise.--Smallguy 19:39, 23 February 2008 (EST)
No Sysops have voluntarily left Conservapedia or deliberately chosen to be inactive.--Aschlafly 19:57, 23 February 2008 (EST
I would say Samwell, Richard and MexMax's exits were calculated and voluntary.Maurice 19:59, 23 February 2008 (EST)
MexMax was not a sysop. Philip J. Rayment 05:15, 24 February 2008 (EST)

Regardless of why, I'm looking for any former sysops who do not edit anymore - can you verify my list on my userpage?--Smallguy 20:02, 23 February 2008 (EST)

SmallGuy, you might be interested to know that some of those sysops you mentioned had their sysop rights terminated because they were discovered to be pro-evolution, just as users are frequently blocked for the same. Just a warning. < removed reference > Anyone there would be happy to help your project.-SamRich 20:04, 23 February 2008 (EST)
As far as I'm aware, nobody was removed simply because they were "pro-evolution". Philip J. Rayment 05:15, 24 February 2008 (EST)
Ok, thanks SamRich, although regardless of why - I'm just looking for verification that my list is accurate - that I'm not missing anyone--Smallguy 20:07, 23 February 2008 (EST)
I have no idea because you haven't said what your list is yet, but I do know that no Sysops have retired or become voluntarily inactive.--Aschlafly 20:19, 23 February 2008 (EST)
Oh, sorry, the list is on User:Smallguy - at the top.--Smallguy 20:21, 23 February 2008 (EST)

Since you said "Final Reply" - I should let you know here that my comment "Much obliged" was not directed at KenH, but rather at you - Ken moved my comment around to suggest otherwise. So again, thank you for the help, Mr. Schlafly, and I will make sure to present everything you have told me in my article.--Smallguy 20:47, 23 February 2008 (EST)

Ah, my apology. I did misunderstand. That was an example of a provocateur inciting unnecessary conflict.--Aschlafly 20:55, 23 February 2008 (EST)

Temp

Can you add Ralph Nader to Template:2008 presidential candidates? Thanks,--IDuan 11:56, 24 February 2008 (EST)

Done. I also removed several candidates no longer in the race. --Crocoite 12:07, 24 February 2008 (EST)
Great! Although, you have an extra dot thing after Smith - the dots only go in between candidates. Thanks Crocoite!--IDuan 12:11, 24 February 2008 (EST)
Fixed. --Crocoite 12:25, 24 February 2008 (EST)

Breaking News

Hello, Mr. Schlafly. Could I have template edit rights? I would like to add to the breaking news on our main page that the Acadamy Awards, in a blatant display of their anti-Christian bias, passed over more worthy films and gave an Oscar to the atheist propaganda film The Golden Compass. --JacobM 21:32, 24 February 2008 (EST)

Thanks, but I don't think that's significant enough. We'll see how others feel about that.--Aschlafly 21:35, 24 February 2008 (EST)
Alright. Thanks for responding so timely though! --JacobM 21:54, 24 February 2008 (EST)

Question on Time

Hey Andy - can you give me an estimation for how much longer edits are allowed? Because I was thinking of working on The Oscars a bit (just adding more stuff especially about best picture), but if edits will be shut down soon I'll just do it tomorrow night (sorry, I would have done this earlier, but, well, I was watching the Oscars ...). Thanks, --IDuan 00:15, 25 February 2008 (EST)

Iduan, why don't you make your edits in Notepad, and then copy them to Conservapedia when editing is available? I use Notepad alot for my rough drafts, then I copy to Conservapedia when I'm ready to see the HTML version. --Crocoite 00:32, 25 February 2008 (EST)
I do occasionally do that - but this is such a simple thing that it won't really matter whether I just copy from a file into CP tomorrow or if I just do the whole thing tomorrow; so I'm just wondering if I'll have time to do it tonight before edits aren't allowed.--IDuan 00:34, 25 February 2008 (EST)
Personal tools