User talk:Gregkochuconn

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search




Hello, Gregkochuconn, and welcome to Conservapedia!

We're glad you are here to edit. We ask that you read our Editor's Guide before you edit.

At the right are some useful links for you. You can include these links on your user page by putting "{{Useful links}}" on the page. Any questions--ask!

Thanks for reading, Gregkochuconn!

--IDuan 11:03, 22 March 2011 (EDT)

Great first edits!--IDuan 11:03, 22 March 2011 (EDT)

In response to your comment on my talk page, you're welcome ... and I've added SkipCatcha privileges to your account to make editing easier!--Andy Schlafly 21:45, 8 December 2011 (EST)

just asking

Seems like you might know; Libertarians are fiscal conservatives but social liberals on most issues except gun rights, am I correct? You seem to define as a libertarian according to that definition, so that's why I'm asking. Thanksbrenden 20:37, 27 June 2012 (EDT)

Gotta love NORML

Cheers for your response on Schlafly's page. Very helpful. I know it's a semantic argument, and the word 'use' implies both possession and consumption, but I've always been under the impression it's only illegal to possess, sell or cultivate drugs. Sambiam


I did sign it with my name, musta been an error with the site.


[1] Edit

What was the purpose of the edit at [2]? It appears to me that you reverted a legitimate edit. Of course, you had just reverted two obvious instances of vandalism in quick succession, so it's possible (probable) that you noticed another user without many prior edits had edited the page and just assumed it was vandalism. However, since you are far more experienced than me, I am posting here rather than simply revert it myself. If there was a reason for your reversion, please explain. If it was an accident like I guessed above, please undo it. Thanks. Gregkochuconn 15:30, 30 September 2012 (EDT)

Freedom to practice one's religion is important and should be protected by law. Homosexuality is merely perversion. Not willing to have a lengthy discussion on this. Conservative 15:07, 12 October 2012 (EDT)

Your Recent Main Page Edit

I saw your recent main page edit regarding user spaces, which inspired me to do a little googling. Since I am not an established user, I feel uncomfortable asserting a position, especially on the main page, so I leave the following without comment:

"TracyS edits from the same IP address as RobS. No wonder why TracyS was such a loser. Once again, RobS, "the greatest lawgiver and rule giver since Moses and Hammurabi", is breaking a Conservapedia rule. Way to stay on top of check user Karajou. It looks like RobS keeps slipping further down the moral high ground. First, he removes the protection from my "castle" and now this. Tsk. tsk. tsk. Conservative 00:01, 12 August 2011 (EDT)"

"Since this isn't Wikipedia, those ideas don't really apply here. Here Andy has proclaimed each user and discussion page the person's "castle". There isn't any history other than the people talking about the edits, several of them, are ones who have made nasty, personal remarks about me. And I don't think it is out of line, given that a persons pages has been declared by the Owner to be their castle, that an understandable explanation be offered, preferably before the editing is done. Maybe it is just me, I don't know anymore. And I still don't understand what was, or is, the "problem"....--Sysop-TK /MyTalk 17:02, 10 May 2007 (EDT)"

"A person's user page is his castle here, so the boxes are fine with me as long as they remain confined to a person's own "turf", and as long as they are clean. Do you have a view?--Aschlafly 20:11, 13 April 2007 (EDT)"

WilliamWB 23:01, 26 November 2012 (EST)

Personal tools