Difference between revisions of "User talk:Aschlafly"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Reverted edits by ObesityEpidemic (talk) to last revision by SeanS)
(If you wouldn't mind: new section)
Line 200: Line 200:
Thank you for upgrading my user rights.  [[User:DavidE|DavidE]] 19:40, 7 November 2011 (EST)
Thank you for upgrading my user rights.  [[User:DavidE|DavidE]] 19:40, 7 November 2011 (EST)
== If you wouldn't mind ==
Could you take away my block rights, as I'm retiring from cp completely now. Thank you for your time and Good luck..--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 21:57, 9 November 2011 (EST)

Revision as of 21:57, 9 November 2011

Archive Index

Post Comments Here

Edit ability removed at certain times

Hi Mr. Schlafly. Did you receive the email I sent to conservapedia@zoho.com about my ability to edit disappearing at certain intervals during the day/night? Is this a problem with my account? Since I have over 650 edits so far, I wouldn't think this is a glitch in Mediawiki's autoconfirmed users group, but I'm not entirely sure. Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help fix the problem. Thank you! Kevin Davis Talk 19:00, 19 October 2011 (EDT)

Hi Mr. Schlafly. The same problem occurred last night, and I just want to make sure that there isn't anything I can do to help its solution. Thank you! Kevin Davis Talk 08:34, 21 October 2011 (EDT)
I'll look into this further. It should work fine for you at this time.--Andy Schlafly 10:12, 21 October 2011 (EDT)
May I add from my experience:
  • there are certain periods of the day when ordinary users aren't allowed to edit Conservapedia, but only those of the group edit: Users with the edit tag are able to edit Conservapedia when night mode occurs (where editing is disabled for everyone except those with administrator or edit tags). Though these periods are somewhat irregular, they tend not to be an inconvenience for Americans with a sound sleep...
  • when you perform too many edits (or even views?) in too short a time, you get blocked from even viewing Conservapedia for some time (a couple of hours?). This happened to me each time when I reverted vandalism and wasn't slowed down sufficiently enough by these annoying captchas. My solution to avoid this is to let the more senior editors handle the reverts.
AugustO 11:05, 21 October 2011 (EDT)
As to the first point, I wasn't aware of the edit group; although I'm not in that group (based on what my preferences' window shows) I've had the issue at various times of the day and morning as well, even around times like 8-9am. I don't think that's the problem. That doesn't fit with this a night time restriction. To the second point, that sounds similar to the connection problems I've had. I haven't seen a correlation between the issue and the number of the edits I make; it normally happens after a few minutes of viewing, whether or not I edit. I try to revert as much as I can, but since the viewing restriction normally activates, I can't finish cleaning up. Does any of this information help, Mr. Schlafly? Thanks! Kevin Davis Talk 15:35, 21 October 2011 (EDT)

Unanswered questions

  • Do you have a scholarly source for the translation of ιδού as at that moment?
  • Do you think that it is right to call Carolus Martellus the grandson of Carolus Magnus?
  • Are we allowed to call them Charlemagne? Charles the Great? Karl der Große? Karl der Hammer? Charles Martel? Karl Martell?

AugustO 03:28, 21 October 2011 (EDT)

The New Revised Standard Version of the Bible -- which is a "scholarly source" -- translates it as "at that moment" here. Also, simply search the internet for ιδού and "at that moment" and you'll see additional examples.
The more difficult question is this: why do you object so much to that rather straightforward translation?--Andy Schlafly 19:13, 21 October 2011 (EDT)
  • Thanks for replying to my questions, it's nice not to be ignored all the time!
  • And it's nice to see that the New Revised Standard Version becomes a reliable source the moment it seems to agree with you. Which it doesn't: As I wrote on April 8 on your talk-page:
The New International Version starts the verse with At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn.., but this at that moment seems to be a translation of the leading καὶ (in fact of the string of καὶ-καὶ-καὶ), while ἰδού is dropped from the sentence altogether - as you observed rightly in Bible Translation Issues.
  • I'm able to draw such a distinction as I'm actually knowing my Greek.
  • BTW: this is a nice example why it is important to archive these pages properly - it would have been nightmarish to find this quotation in the diffs, and impossible to do so if this page happened to be deleted.
  • A translation is a scholarly source for the translation of ιδού as at that moment? That's a surprise: the annotations may be, but the translation itself isn't sufficient - as you see above.
  • I'm really disappointed that you come up with the old canard simply search the internet for ιδού and "at that moment" and you'll see additional examples, while it was proven wrong over and over again. This is disturbing: it shows that you are willing to ignore factual evidence. Is this the sign of an open mind?
  • So the real question is: Why are you ignoring any fact which doesn't agree with you?
  • And again, you haven't answered the questions:
    • Do you think that it is right to call Carolus Martellus the grandson of Carolus Magnus?
    • Are we allowed to call them Charlemagne? Charles the Great? Karl der Große? Karl der Hammer? Charles Martel? Karl Martell?
Waiting with bated breath, yours AugustO 03:13, 22 October 2011 (EDT)
August, I find your comments to be a mixture of putdowns and preordained conclusions, rather than an open-minded discussion. Seriously, volunteer to do some charitable work somewhere instead. If you want me to respond to your postings, then try a more open-minded and less insulting style.--Andy Schlafly 15:09, 22 October 2011 (EDT)
You are providing me with a quite difficult task:
  • When a question has to be repeatedly asked because it is answered insufficiently again and again, the questions tend to sound a little bit shrill.
  • When you repeat your claim that I should simply search the internet for ιδού and "at that moment" and you'll see additional examples, while I have shown this to be wrong a couple of times, it is hard to describe this behavior without sounding uncivil. The first time, I thought you were joking when you came up with a google search as an argument. After a couple of times (and put downs) you now must be aware that you are repeating an incorrect statement. There is a very short word for such an act!
  • Can the question whether Carolus Magnus was the grandfather of Carolus Martellus be discussed with an open-mind? Only for a very short period after which it is clear that this statement is wrong. Is there any justification to call such a statement right when correcting a home-work? No, we can only say that it was erroneously called right. Of course, we can discuss whether it is worse to write Martell or to mix up his ancestry!
  • As for answering my questions: I would really appreciate if you would do so, not only to pamper me, but for the sake of your project. You argued that some of these questions were nitpicky, but I think that you agree that we can't be nitpicky enough when we try to translate the Bible!
AugustO 17:20, 22 October 2011 (EDT)

Request from a while back

I guess it was lost again in the archives, but I requested image uploading privileges a while back for my musician articles and helping out anyone who needed it. I know you're busy and probay have many other important priorities, but I would greatly appreciate it if you looked at this. Many thanks!--James Wilson 08:48, 22 October 2011 (EDT)

James, could you link to some examples of what you have in mind?--Andy Schlafly 15:12, 22 October 2011 (EDT)
Most certainly. Elvis Presley could use a few more images, and I would like to upload movie posters and stills as I develop Elvis Presley movies and related articles, as well as Billy Idol, Meat Loaf, etc. I would also like to help out with Conservapedia:Image upload requests. Many thanks, Mr. Schlafly!--James Wilson 15:45, 22 October 2011 (EDT)
Some examples of the images themselves would be this, this, and and this. Of course, there would be more.--James Wilson 16:09, 22 October 2011 (EDT)
I also will be creating more musician articles in the near future, as well as adding to the existing ones, and would also upload images for Bob Dylan, Little Richard, Buddy Holly, and many others. Most of the images I would get for articles would be from the Commons, per suggestion by Jpatt.--James Wilson 09:41, 23 October 2011 (EDT)

Edit thing again

Hi Mr. Schlafly, in the middle of those reverts, editing was off for me. Granted it was less than ten minutes, but whatever triggers editing on and off seems to be messing up again. Thanks!--James Wilson 22:03, 23 October 2011 (EDT)

I had a similar problem again today as well; if this is the result of a night-time editing restriction, is the server's time zone incorrectly configured? My problem occurred about 12 pm today (Central time) which clearly shouldn't be listed as night time anywhere in the US. Kevin Davis Talk 22:53, 23 October 2011 (EDT)

Image upload

Hi Mr. Schlafly. Could this picture be uploaded for use in the Sharpe ratio article? Sharpe is an extremely important person in the field of finance, so I think it would make a great addition to the article. Kevin Davis Talk 23:00, 23 October 2011 (EDT)

Can you find a better source, with more info and credits?--Andy Schlafly 00:38, 24 October 2011 (EDT)
I might work in finding a different image. In the grand scheme of things, an image might not actually be that important for this article. What's your opinion? Kevin Davis Talk 09:22, 24 October 2011 (EDT)


I am having problems staying within the rules it would appear. User:Conservative refuses to leave feedback in his edit summaries. I am not sure how I am supposed to stay on the right side of the 90/10 rule if I keep having to jump to the talkpages to find out why I was reverted. JohnPaulJonesRevWar 09:38, 24 October 2011 (EDT)


Hi Mr. Schlafly. In my attempt to stall the user who was just blocked (User:Caterpillar) I left a message on his talk page. That page can safely be deleted now, I think. Thank you for the block! Kevin Davis Talk 08:53, 25 October 2011 (EDT)

Thank you for deleting the page! Kevin Davis Talk 22:24, 27 October 2011 (EDT)

Public Schools may be more conservative than you think

Hello, Andy. I am a public school student and I have my history textbook right in front of me, a textbook that is decidedly not liberal, nor atheistic as you claim public schools are. We're studying the European Industrial Revolution, and one person who lived in that time period was Charles Darwin. The textbook took some time to explain Darwin's theory of evolution, but introduced it by calling it "the most disturbing new idea..." Just as much time was dedicated to the initial negative reaction from Christians who believed that The Bible had the correct account of the origin of life, and to talk about Social Darwinism, which some thinkers used Darwin's theories to promote. (Darwin himself never promoted any social ideas) When I read the line "Social Darwinism encouraged racism", I knew something here at CP had to be cleared up. Immediately afterward, the textbook talks about Christianity in the same time period, and how Christians pushed for better conditions and started the Social Gospel, which urged Christians everywhere to social service. Not as much time is used to talk about that as was used to talk about Darwin and evolution, but the segment on Christianity, unlike the latter, was overwhelmingly positive, and it was paced at the end of the section to be the last thing the reader reads about. This is decidedly anti-liberal and anti-atheist. And this is coming from the agnostic (conservative) public school student. That is all. --SpenserL 20:38, 25 October 2011 (EDT)

Likely, one of those textbooks issued by conservative Texas.--Jpatt 20:44, 25 October 2011 (EDT)
A school district in New York issued these. --SpenserL 20:46, 25 October 2011 (EDT)
In general, it's better to look at trends in aggregate than specific, anecdotal examples. You may have one textbook that bears certain opinions, but that does not invalidate the idea that in general, history textbooks support a distinct world view. Kevin Davis Talk 22:25, 27 October 2011 (EDT)
"From my experiences, and those of my parents (both from the northeast) that world view appears to be Christianity. Fact is, when this country claims to be Christian, it walks the walk too. --SpenserL 21:23, 1 November 2011 (EDT)

Block of AugustO

Could you please lift the block of my account User:AugustO? The reasons can be found here. Thanks. ErnestO 13:45, 26 October 2011 (EDT) (AugustO)

Now you must be aware of the ErnestO/AugustO situation. You seem to accept my contributions to Talk:Conservative_Bible_Project#Top_5_Bible_verses, and I enjoy such a debate. But somehow I fear the sword of Damocles over my sock. Could you please find a solution: Unblock AugustO springs to my mind :-) ErnestO 19:09, 26 October 2011 (EDT)
Sysops generally do not unblock other Sysops' blocks. You should raise the issue with the Sysop who blocked you.--Andy Schlafly 22:51, 26 October 2011 (EDT)
I raised the issue with User:Ed Poor (the sysop who blocked me) a day ago (see here), using this sock, as the email channels (which I tried earlier) don't seem to work. ErnestO 07:53, 27 October 2011 (EDT) (AugustO)

The block of AugustO is now more than a week old. Ed Poor hasn't reacted to various attempts to contact him. So, could you do something about the block? Thanks. ErnestO 11:11, 31 October 2011 (EDT)

Pro life news story

Hi Mr. Schafly. I found this article earlier today. Is this the sort of item that you place on the front page? Kevin Davis Talk 14:28, 26 October 2011 (EDT)

Pro-life stories are the "sort of item" we post, but that's not a story worth posting. Our standards are high and we don't promote gimmicks.--Andy Schlafly 16:04, 26 October 2011 (EDT)
Could you elaborate on your point, please? As an opponent of abortion, I'm of the opinion that any victory would be a positive, even if promoting a fertilized egg as a person is a bit of a gimmick. Life begins at conception, which is when the egg is fertilized. Kevin Davis Talk 17:15, 26 October 2011 (EDT)
Gimmicks are often not helpful, and the personhood referenda have actually been quite hurtful. In Colorado they lost by more than 70% of the vote, twice, and dragged down some terrific pro-life candidates to defeat.--Andy Schlafly 22:10, 27 October 2011 (EDT)
I understand the purpose, because as I said before, life begins at conception. Therefore, the concept is sound, but unfortunately it's not the best way to prevent abortions. I'm of the opinion that overturning Roe v. Wade would be a more logical step. Do you have an opinion? Kevin Davis Talk 22:23, 27 October 2011 (EDT)

Image upload privileges request

I don't know if you saw it, but I answered your question asking what I would do, a few posts above. I just ask since it's been a while and I didn't get a reply. Many thanks!--James Wilson 12:30, 27 October 2011 (EDT)

James, sorry for the delay, but your request does not lend itself to a quick answer. One problem is that you're suggesting material that is not particularly encyclopedic or educational or otherwise enlightening. Please don't take offense at that, but pop "stars" are not all that helpful, at least not to learning or (in general) as role models either.--Andy Schlafly 22:09, 27 October 2011 (EDT)
Ah, I understand completely. Perhaps I will add some content that fits the mold of "educational" as well, such as articles on the history of Michigan and such instead of focusing solely on the musician articles. I was not intending to do the musician articles solely, but I indeed will add that content soon. Many thanks!--James Wilson 22:19, 27 October 2011 (EDT)


Mr. Schlafly, Did you receive the email I sent to conservapedia@zoho.com? I asked that you respond, so I want to make sure that you did receive it. Thank you. Kevin Davis Talk 14:12, 28 October 2011 (EDT)

Mr. Schlafly. I assume that you did not receive the email? Could you please send me another email address that is checked so I can respond to these issues in private? Thank you. Kevin Davis Talk 12:46, 31 October 2011 (EDT)


Hello, Mr. Schlafly. I understand your point on the musician articles not really being of educational value. I do feel Elvis Presley is, however, since he has become as much of a historical figure as a musical one. Now, since this website is indeed not Wikipedia and avoids that sort of popular culture bloat, I wonder if an expansion of the content on the history of Michigan would be of value to the site? I have already sarted articles on the Treaty of Saginaw, former Detroit mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, and the Constitution of Michigan. I was thinking of adding articles on the governors, treaties, the copper and lumber industires, the Sweet trial, and others. Would these be of value to Conservapedia, at least more so than the music articles? I have also taken a course on Michigan history at a college. Many thanks, Mr. Schlafly!--James Wilson 12:38, 29 October 2011 (EDT)


I thought "global warming" means that the average air temperature increases significantly, but some AGW supporters are saying it causes warmer summers and colder winters. Sounds a bit Orwellian to me. --Ed Poor Talk 19:13, 29 October 2011 (EDT)

World History Homework

Dear Andy,

You'll forgive me for not using a more formal mode of address, considering your impolite recent activity. I'll also keep this rejoinder short, as I suspect that reacting to the attempted Conservapedia coup d'etat over your Conservative Bible Project must be a strain on your time.

Recently, I posted a list of fifteen errors you had made while marking the homework for World History Lecture Five. Your response to this was to call your students' concerns "nitpicky". When I and other students pressed you on your lack of a more substantial response, and following your increasing curtness, unprofessionalism, and demonstrations of a breathtaking contempt for the students that you are supposed to teach, you blocked me for a week and attempted to delete all evidence of student concerns. Bravo on your academic prowess, Mr Schlafly. There really is no finer way to show courtesy, professionalism, and respect for your students than by dismissing, deleting, and blocking them.

It is noticeable that since the incident, your World History classes appear to have ground to a halt. The homework for Lecture Six was utterly pointless - as evidenced by the extremely poor turn-in rate - while your latest exam is a shockingly poor attempt to grade our knowledge. It is noticeable that at the top of the Midterm Exam, you write that no marks will be subtracted for wrong answers. The only logical outcome of this is that every submitted exam will receive 100%. What is the point of this?

In your articles on professor values and the liberal elite, you make a number of criticisms of poor teaching styles, grade inflation, and the apparent ineptitude and contemptuous arrogance of academics. Perhaps you would do well to remember the words of Jesus in Matthew 7:4-5 and Luke 6:42: "Why do you notice the speck of dust in your brother's eye? How dare you say to your brother "Remove the dust from your eye" when you have a log in your own eye? You hypocrite! First remove the log from your own eye, then you can see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's."

It is clear from your dismissive attitude and air of disdain towards your students that you have no intention of admitting your errors, correcting your mistakes, or improving the quality of your homework assignments. Perhaps you consider Pride to be a greater grace than Humility. This would explain your equally disdainful attitude towards concerns surrounding your Conservative Bible Project. Yet your utter refusal to amend, correct, or even admit that you made a mistake in the first place, is causing you harm. If you had simply acknowledged your errors and oversights, apologised, and amended them, then the whole issue would have died down on the same day it was raised. But instead you have drawn far more attention to yourself - and your appalling lack of academic professionalism and personal politeness - by ignoring your students, attempting to burn the evidence, and blocking anyone who questions you. And this is not restricted to the World History Lectures. Your prideful ignorance of concerns, and your breathtakingly rude attitude, are causing your loyal sysops to withdraw from a Conservapedia increasingly dominated by family-unfriendly smut articles, while your closest lieutenant has made your crass errors and self-serving arrogance over the Conservative Bible Project a subject of increasing public embarrasment for you.

If you wish Conservapedia to become a useful resource, rather than a shrinking forum for you to flaunt your sullen pride and uncharitable contempt, perhaps you could do your own students the courtesy of actually acknowledging and responding to their concerns, rather than simply deleting the issues and blocking your own students in a backfired attempt to conceal your baleful pride.

We, your students, look forward to each receiving 100% on the Midterm Exam, in accordance with your assurance that there will be "No penalty for wrong answers."


RexBanner 14:49, 30 October 2011 (EDT)

Rex, the teacher runs a class, not a student. The midterm exam is posted.--Andy Schlafly 15:29, 30 October 2011 (EDT)
Rex, the Bible is a best selling family friendly work and mentioned the topic in question 4 separate times. Second, the articles used respected news and conservative websites as sources and for quote purposes. Next time you wish to accuse someone for posting smut, you should consider being accurate and fair minded. In addition, I posted some material at this website because the wiki software made it easy. Plus, I have done some anti-vandal volunteer work. I really don't consider myself to be some "lieutenant" or assistant in some wiki war. I just posted the articles at this wiki as a public service. By the way, you should consider using Firefox as a browser as it has a spell checker. You misspelled the word embarrassment. Since you seem to appreciate and long for the "red pen", I thought I would point this misspelling out to you. Conservative 07:32, 1 November 2011 (EDT)

Edit thing.... again?

Sorry to bug you again about this, Mr. Schlafly, but the edit thing went out again yesterday afternoon and this morning. Many thanks if you could look into this!--James Wilson 12:38, 3 November 2011 (EDT)

It's been working fine the past two days for me now, but I wonder what makes it go off like that at all?--James Wilson 13:44, 5 November 2011 (EDT)

I've had the same problem a few times in the last couple of days as well. Did you receive my email, Mr. Schlafly? I asked about it above, but since it may get lost in the talk page, I wanted to post about it again in this (more recent) section. Thank you! Kevin Davis Talk 15:58, 6 November 2011 (EST)
The same thing that should be turning it off around midnight EST, the edit group exists for a reason--SeanS 18:26, 6 November 2011 (EST)
No, we're not talking about the nighttime shutdown. We're talking about it being shut down in the middle of the day. Also, Sean, what's the "edit" group?--James Wilson 19:07, 6 November 2011 (EST)

Repeat offenders are making "Catholicism" article derogatory

Please come to Talk:Roman Catholic Church and for more information. -danq 21:55, 6 November 2011 (EST)

My Two Cents

I've been a member of Conservapedia for over 3 years. I have over 1,000 edits. I have created numerous articles, all of which are well-cited, well-written and correctly formatted. I have tried for a very long time to keep my mouth shut, but I honestly can't any more.

This site has turned into a laughing stock. You have one of your Admins going around creating ridiculous essays with one picture, a caption and some moronic dialog to it? This is the alternative to Wikipedia that we aim for? Is it supposed to be funny? I haven't seen you lobby to have any of them removed so obviously you feel as though they are important to the site for reasons completely beyond me. You've lost Dan, Tim and Phillip who were all great contributors to the site and replaced them with parodists who do nothing but sit and laugh at everything they have written, and then cackle when you put your seal of approval on top of it. JPatt and EdPoor seem to be the only active sysops who are actually genuine.

I've never once lied about my beliefs or values on here. You know that I'm not as conservative as some people here, and you know that I'm not a Christian, and yet I've still put a lot of work into this site ... and for what? To have it mocked due to ignorance and parody? Well no more.

Put the hammer down, Andy. Take your project and put it back on the right path.

--Jeff W. LauttamusDiscussion 11:33, 7 November 2011 (EST)

JLauttamus, I do like to see people create educational content at Conservapedia. At the same time, the foolish ideologies of atheism and evolutionism not only deserve to be satirized and mocked, but they deserved to be crushed. The Question evolution! campaign is a an excellent grassroots campaign to aggressively decimate adherence to the deceitful and foolhardy fables of atheists such as evolutionism, abiogenesis, "little green alien life forms", etc. etc. And the evolutionists usual bag of tricks will not be able to stop it. Conservative 12:03, 7 November 2011 (EST)
Actually (and unfortunately), JLauttamus, I found little of substance in your contribution history here for the past six months. And your reference to only two active sysops being "actually genuine" is not correct.
This site continues to grow and educate. Unlike many other wikis, this site actually teaches people, and does so without atheistic censorship. As with Christianity, conservatism, and almost anything else of value, some people seem to enjoy leaving, and Parthian shots are familiar.
I hope you can reconsider because I've enjoyed discussing issues with you here. But if not, all the best to you.--Andy Schlafly 12:34, 7 November 2011 (EST)
You're right, I haven't been contributing very much as of late, and even if I were to reconsider, it wouldn't make much of an impact. You're also right that this site teaches people a lot of different things; the articles relating to origins theory — the ones pertaining to ID and YEC, at least (like this one, check the history) — are probably some of the most comprehensive out there. I wish only the best for this site, and while I haven't contributed for a while, I have still followed it as closely as I can. Take it as a Parthian shot if you'd like, I would just like to see you reel in some of the non-educational material that has absolutely no substance.
And Conservative, your little essays don't do anything to help "aggressively decimate adherence to the deceitful and foolhardy fables of atheists", they make the opposition to atheists appear just plain silly. The best way to attack this is with knowledge and science, not by making jokes about atheist doctors and fat people. -- Jeff W. LauttamusDiscussion 14:00, 7 November 2011 (EST)
JLauttamus, if you as an atheist want to achieve some sort of "victory" through misquotation, that just provides further evidence that atheists are fools. Second, I understand that many proud atheists are going to be upset about the satires. I can live with that. For all their mocking, atheists certainly have thin skins when it comes to comedy and satire. It has been said that their father has a thin skin as well. "The Devil, the proud spirit, cannot endure to be mocked." - Thomas More. Feel free to engage in last wordism at this point. Conservative 21:10, 7 November 2011 (EST)
Then my last word will be thank you for the opportunity to voice my opinions. I wish you both the best, and I hope to see this site continue to grow. Good luck to both of you. -- Jeff W. LauttamusDiscussion 08:52, 8 November 2011 (EST)

Re: Congratulations

Thanks Mr. Schlafly, I'll make sure you won't regret it! - Markman 16:46, 7 November 2011 (EST)

Thank you.

Thank you for upgrading my user rights. DavidE 19:40, 7 November 2011 (EST)

If you wouldn't mind

Could you take away my block rights, as I'm retiring from cp completely now. Thank you for your time and Good luck..--SeanS 21:57, 9 November 2011 (EST)