User talk:Aschlafly

From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by KingHanksley (Talk | contribs) at 15:33, 21 March 2012. It may differ significantly from current revision.

Jump to: navigation, search

Archive Index

Information about Conservapedia

Hello Mr Schlafly, I've been reading a lot of Conservapedia articles about creation vs evolution. You are mainly expressing a Christian viewpoint. However, several of my friends are Hindus and it is written that Lord Brahma is the creator of all. How can you express disagreement over their viewpoints without that admitting that Bible is, after all, a book, too. Please reply. -Lily P.S. How do you pronounce your last name?

Hello Mr. Schlafly. User Jpatt redirected me to your biography, and I had several questions for you about your personal background and the site itself. If possible, our class work would be published in Loyola's primary publication, the Phoenix. 1. I read the information about the founding of Conservapedia, and I'm interested in more details. What drove you to make the choice to move from Ivy League law practice to online communication and media dissemination? Do you have any advice for someone looking to publish on the web, especially given that technology moves so quickly in the modern age? Thank you for the information. Sarah

The traditional media options have been:
  • write a book, with a typical best-seller reaching only about 30,000 people, and only one one topic
  • appear on television, prevented by the format from conveying anything of substance and reaching only a "dumbed down" audience
  • print a newspaper, which is too slow and anachronistic today, and dominated by biased liberals
Conservapedia is obviously better than all the traditional options. Conservapedia reaches far more people, on far more topics, than hundreds of best-selling books. Conservapedia provides substantive information in contrast with the television medium, and to an audience that is not dumbed down as TV viewers are. Conservapedia is also much quicker than newspapers, and free of the their liberal bias.
As an added, bonus, Conservapedia incorporates the best of the public. Your student newspaper should consider switching over to a format like Conservapedia to benefit from insights and information offered by your students, and to provide more content than the fixed format can. But some liberals in the media oppose opening their formats to more public input, because that reduces liberals' ability to censor and control. Increasingly, traditional media are about controlling information rather than providing it. Thank God that Conservapedia contributors are able to bypass that liberal censorship here.--Andy Schlafly 10:15, 3 March 2012 (EST)
I don't know how Loyola's newspaper works, but UConn's paper allows any student at the university to write for them, and with a few exceptions, can't censor content based on opinion (presumably because we are partially funded by University Funds. As of tomorrow, I'm going to be a writer for them, so I'm not going to cost myself a job by saying anything bad. But it does have a huge liberal bias. Gregkochuconn 19:22, 4 March 2012 (EST)
That's an interesting observation, Greg. As you suggest, I think that may be an advantage of state schools.--Andy Schlafly 20:39, 4 March 2012 (EST)
Could be. Then again, maybe not. It does lead to a lot of liberals getting in, but it also allows conservatives to voice their opinions. My understanding is that as long as it's not completely inappropriate (i.e. "kill all the black people") and as long as you can write 600 words about it, you'll get in. That does allow some people who are even further to the left than private papers to get in (we had one column a few weeks ago openly advocating socialism) but it also allows conservative students to get in when normally they would be ignored by the paper. But I should be careful what I say about it in public. Gregkochuconn 22:41, 4 March 2012 (EST)
Hello Mr. Schlafly,
My name is Ted. I'm another student in Communications 206, Writing for the Web, and I'd like to follow up on your responses to my colleague Sarah, if you don't mind. You describe how Conservapedia attracts an audience of a higher intelligence than television does, and this makes me curious, as studies have been conducted that find differing levels of intelligence among consumers of different forms of media. However, such studies have often had difficulty with mediums on the web because of the dynamic nature of their viewers. How do you quantify the average intelligence of your average viewer? Although it may be difficult, I would guess that it is certainly possible to create a rough estimate of the intelligence of an editor once they make several contributions, but I'm curious how this process works for someone who only views the project.
Also, you briefly discussed how the format of television prevents it from conveying anything of substance. Could you expand on this? Are you referring to technical limitations of television, like NTSC/PAL conflicts, or the traditionally non-interactive nature of television programs? If the latter, what is your opinion on newer forms of television that utilize Internet connections and interactive content, to list a few examples?
Our student newspaper functions on a similar model, since any student is allowed to submit work to the paper to have it published. The only editing or "censorship" that takes place is basic copy editing for grammar and location, because the newspaper has several distinct sections that are only filled with certain kinds of content. For example, if someone submits a classified advertisement to the section dealing with construction on campus, the article will be rejected with a note asking the student to resubmit it to the correct section. This is simply a courtesy to make the lives of the editing staff simpler. Also, as a private Catholic university, problems like the liberal bias you speak of are not widespread, least of all in our student works and publications. I do not speak for my university when I say this, but I personally believe that problems of bias would be *significantly* greater at a state school than a private religious institution. No population is homogenous, of course, but as a university that currently houses its own seminary, sends almost six buses worth of students to the March for Life in Washington, D.C. every year, and maintains a highly efficient budget that has allowed us to construct numerous new buildings and free ourselves from debt in less than two decades, I think the credentials of our university and student body are quite secure.
Thank you for the information and your time. I look forward to hearing from you.
It's a sad day when UConn sends more buses full of students to our basketball games in Hartford than you send to March for Life. But I digress. Yes, given that you have significantly more conservative students than the average institution, I'd imagine you're right. However, a private but nonreligious school could censor its students articles easily. I don't know if most of them do or not, though. I attended a summer program at Amherst College (hosted by the college but not directly affiliated with it) and at one point, we had to look through old campus newspapers. They have a huge liberal bias, far bigger than UConn's. Of course, Amherst is a far more liberal school than UConn. And I didn't work for the paper at Amherst, so I can't say for sure what goes on there. And as for our budget, we're going to go bankrupt in 2014 if we don't get a student fee increase passed. It's being voted on by students as we speak, and in a couple of days, I'll know if it got approved. Gregkochuconn 12:16, 5 March 2012 (EST)
Hi Greg. I think your comparison fallacy digresses, as you say, from the true intent of my statement, since a more valid comparison would be the number of buses each school sends to the March for Life, relative to their undergraduate populations. Moving past that, however, I do not believe the point is worth debating because there are many indications of the religious and political leanings of a school, outside of a bus count. I understand your point, though, and as a student, I know that the university could push our support for March for Life to a much greater extent. Even though "a private but nonreligious school could censor its students' articles easily," I fail to see how that applies to Loyola University, because we are most certainly *not* a nonreligious institution. The president of our university is himself a Catholic clergyman. What applies to private, nonreligious schools does not apply to our institution at all, because Catholicism is the core tenet of our school (our school's motto is a true testament to that, as it embodies our mission and goals succinctly). You openly admit that your school has a problem with bias, and impugning the integrity of a school that has a significantly lesser problem with the issue is irrelevant and a distraction from the issue at hand.
As to your other point, perhaps your university could learn a lesson from Father Garanzini's debt management expertise, if you are so close to becoming bankrupt? To be fair, a state school like yours is subject to the whims and problems of state budget difficulties, but nevertheless, Loyola University went through rough times and emerged a stronger school for it. Although the university does raise our tuition every three to four years to compensate for inflation, rising construction costs, etc. we have kept a handle on other costs, e.g. labor costs, through innovative means. Several of our more left-leaning students attempted to unionize student workers in the mess halls because several student workers complained about working when the mess halls were open, despite how contradictory that complaint may be. Thankfully, the school decided against these efforts and continues to use private contractors in every possible capacity to reduce costs. Maybe your school could adapt some of these ideas? I notice that the University of Connecticut is currently spending millions on its campus in Avery Point, including oceanography and marine biology programs. Perhaps your university should balance its budget *before* spending millions on programs like these? My university certainly spends money on programs that I question, but we have this ability because we are not in dire financial straits as you are.
However, university finances nor the biases of our respective universities are not the focus of my questions to Mr. Schlafly. I am interested in his work writing on the web, per the title of our course, and would like to constrain the discussion to those issues. If you have knowledge of the system from the server side, as I assume he does as the owner, then please feel free to incorporate your knowledge into an answer. Otherwise, I would greatly prefer his perspective on the site and my original questions. Thank you.
Ted, I'm surprised and impressed that Loyola sends six buses to the March for Life! That said, I don't think I criticized your college (I am not very familiar with Loyola, and would like to learn more about the school).
Conservapedia is a far better medium for communicating, educating, learning, etc., than television, books and newspapers are. I didn't say that Conservapedia users have higher intelligence than television-watchers, although on average I expect that is true. My point is that the medium and format of Conservapedia is far more substantive than television is. This simple conversation and debate could not even occur on television, with its limiting sound-bites, commercial breaks, and overall "dumbed down" format. Forty years ago a guest on a talk show would have something like 7 minutes to make a point. Today it is more like 7 seconds! Counterexamples to an Old Earth are profound and take longer than 7 seconds to communicate and understand, and benefits from the printed word just as textbooks do. Moreover, no host on mainsteam television is going to invite someone on to speak to profound issues that may "offend" a portion of the liberal audience, as the truth often does. We are not so constrained here.
Added to that are the discussions that ensue on Conservapedia, like this one. How often does a television viewer get a chance to open a dialog with the persons seen on the television? Virtually never, of course.
As to the student newspaper's procedures for accepting and editing submissions, why not allow that immediately, wiki-style, as Conservapedia does?--Andy Schlafly 18:17, 5 March 2012 (EST)
My point with the private university argument is that a private school (receiving no state funds) could easily censor the conservative viewpoint (which is what we were originally talking about). I don't know if any do, but they could. UConn's paper cannot do that. However, we do try to keep a journalistic standard, meaning "Stop hating on Obama" (actually the example used as what NOT to write) will not get in. I don't know if we've had any issues in the past with people being told they couldn't get printed because they failed to meet a journalistic standard, but as long as you're a competent writer capable of writing 670-760 words on your topic, you should get in. So that would be the problem with doing it wiki-style. Also, that would make it hard to distribute print copies, although we may scale back on those if the fee increase doesn't pass. (Results should be announced soon and since voting was done online, I have no idea what is taking so long) since the fee increase failed. Gregkochuconn 08:54, 8 March 2012 (EST)
Also, to clarify, the Daily Campus is in danger of going bankrupt. The University itself is not. Gregkochuconn 09:02, 8 March 2012 (EST)

Elvis Presley movies

Mr. Schlafly, in this article, the formatting is set off by the infoboxes used for each movie. Is there a way to fix this, or would creating a separate article for each movie (I am not necessarily sure on the site's policy) be more acceptable? And if the latter is the more acceptable option, could you delete the old article after I transfer the information? I will edit the Elvis template accordingly. I hope to also put up image requests for film posters to add to the infoboxes as the article(s) develop further. Thanks.--James Wilson 16:43, 3 March 2012 (EST)


Andy, I have a disagreement with User:Ed Poor over the name of a page. The page is for the It Gets Better Project. The official name includes the word "Project". Ed disagrees that it is a real project and therefore believes it should not be part of the title. I, on the other hand, do not believe that personal opinions on that should get in the way of factual information. Such an opinion should be in the article if he wishes it to be included. I was hoping that you would offer your opinion on the matter since I do not wish to get into an edit war. Thanks, Ayzmo :) 15:59, 4 March 2012 (EST)

"It Gets Better" is a lot of things: a slogan, a video, an actual "dead tree" book [1] and a campaign. Feel free to make a section about any distinct project you may discern, at the It Gets Better page. And also remember even the media don't call Savage's partner a "husband". --Ed Poor Talk 20:41, 4 March 2012 (EST)


Dear Mr. Schlafly,

I saw that you deleted the vandalism at Talk:1. However, you must have inadvertently left the article page, 1, intact (even though it is vandalism created by the same blocked user). It is currently marked for speedy deletion. GregG 19:21, 4 March 2012 (EST)

Thanks. I just removed it as you suggested.--Andy Schlafly 20:30, 4 March 2012 (EST)


Dear Professor Schlafly,

Super Tuesday is tomorrow and we still haven't made an endorsement. I have raised this issue several times and done my best to edit the important articles in this area, but have received little support from anyone on this site. I am asking you with the utmost sincerity to make the right choice and endorse a conservative candidate in the Republican primaries ASAP. As I said in my post on the main page talk page, the left side of the main page is entirely devoted to the Question Evolution Campaign. This seems like a serious strategic error. There is a real campaign going on right now (the Republican Primaries) that will effect the course of the nation far more than a few youtube videos and a blog about evolution ever will. Please consider making an endorsement tomorrow, the fate of the nation could be in your hands... --CraigF 23:20, 5 March 2012 (EST)

Government funding for anti-Christian values

Hello Mr. Schlafly. I just created the article Government funding for anti-Christian values, and while I plan to continue to expand it, I just wanted to see if I could get your input on the topic (and maybe if a better name exists for the page). Thanks!--MorrisF 16:34, 7 March 2012 (EST)

Excellent Site Andy.

Just an libertarian-minded Conservative (since around 2007) passing through and letting you know that:

1. I like the site

2. Your Mom is an awesome lady!

Be well sir, and keep fighting!

-Pat Thoughts and Rantings DetroitRight 02:36, 14 March 2012 (EDT)

Archives for talk main page faulty

Hi Andy, the index for Talk:Mainpage's archives contains incorrect internal links, and is out of order. Archive 108 actually links to archive 109, nothing links to archive 108, and archive 107 is non-existant, it merely being a link to archive 106 again. I just thought I should bring this to your attention, if you should like to fix it--CamilleT 18:56, 14 March 2012 (EDT)

Mainstream media attacks on arbitration

So I was reading about the AT&T data throttling case where AT&T elected to pay the judgment and not appeal the small claims ruling [2] and the article, expectedly, misrepresents the nature of arbitration in saying that "[small claims court] also doesn't require parties in the proceeding to keep their mouths shut after a decision is rendered, as arbitration does." AT&T has not had a confidentiality requirement in its arbitration clause in over half a decade, and most of the major companies with arbitration clauses also do not require confidentiality of the award. To me, this seems like yet another attempt by the liberal media to malign arbitration and represent that the lawyer-benefiting class action is the only way that consumers can recover damages. We should cover this more on Conservapedia since the mainstream media appears to be content to lie and distort legal issues. GregG 17:15, 17 March 2012 (EDT)

This is an interesting observation and you may be right. But is the article wrong in its explanation? You did not cite anything to support your view that the article is wrong.--Andy Schlafly 19:51, 18 March 2012 (EDT)
At least with regards to AT&T, I can tell you that this article is wrong. In 2003, the 9th Circuit held a confidentiality provision in AT&T's agreement unconscionable (Ting v. AT&T). According to McKee v. AT&T Corp. (Wash. 2008), by March 2005, AT&T had revised its agreements to remove the requirement that the consumer keep the arbitration confidential. In the 2009 ninth circuit opinion in Laster v. AT&T Mobility (which was overturned by the Supreme Court in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion), the panel indicated that under revisions to AT&T Mobility's agreement between 2006 and 2008, customers were not required to keep arbitrations confidential. So as it pertains to AT&T Mobility, the article appears to make the suggestion that if Mr. Spaccarrelli had gone to arbitration instead of small claims court, he would not be able to post documents on the web relating to his claim. This is false, and it has been false for several years.
As I understand it, the trend in consumer agreements (at least prior to Concepcion) has been to remove non-consumer-friendly provisions (except for class-action waivers), such as unfair fee allocations, limits or bars against recovery of certain types of damages, inconvenient arbitration locations, and the like. With a few exceptions (the Starbucks gift card agreement and the Wells Fargo account agreement), I do not know of any consumer-business arbitration agreement that requires the parties to keep the arbitration confidential. I could try to research some law review articles to help make my point further, but I am short of time right now, and I had better be finishing up. The point is that the article is wrong in its claim that arbitration generally requires parties to keep the arbitration confidential (both with respect to AT&T and with respect to consumer-business agreements), and that this misrepresentation serves to discredit arbitration as an alternative to class action lawsuits.
Let me know if you want me to explain further. As I said, I'm a bit pressed for time right now, so I'll leave my response at this. GregG 21:33, 18 March 2012 (EDT)

Conservative Dictionary

Would you consider starting a conservative wiki dictionary similar to Wiktionary, but with a focus on conservative words? I think a lot of editors would be enthusiastic about the idea. KingHanksley 18:10, 18 March 2012 (EDT)

We already have Essay:Best New Conservative Words. I'm not sure building an entire dictionary is time well spent when, for example, that time could be spent on translating the Bible instead.--Andy Schlafly 19:49, 18 March 2012 (EDT)
Well, I think it could serve a few purposes. It could work side-by-side with the CBP. As editors discover the biblical significance of certain words, they could add them to the dictionary. It could also help to sharpen the linguistic skills of Conservapedia editors, which is very important to protect the site. And it could be a project in which users with no expertise in ancient languages could participate more easily than in the fairly limited role they could play in translation. KingHanksley 00:27, 20 March 2012 (EDT)
You make some good suggestions here. How about starting it as a "category", and including terms like Son of Man?--Andy Schlafly 01:10, 20 March 2012 (EDT)
Andy, I took your suggestion, and began adding words to the project, only to discover this already existed (I had somehow missed this early). . I'll redirect my efforts to helping with that existing project, which is much more developed than my own. KingHanksley 16:33, 21 March 2012 (EDT)

Stolen concept - new example

What’s wrong with my new example at Stolen concept? It’s almost identical to an existing example. Ann Coulter, George W. Bush and Tony Blair surely believe that we should invade other countries to bring freedom to their people. Is it just a lack of citations? Here’s one for Ann Coulter - I can provide some more if that’s the only problem. And please don’t block me, I had to create a new account just so that I could ask this question. The create account page says “Real name is optional”, BTW, and can you please provide a link to your user name policy. Zsedcftgbhujmko 08:58, 19 March 2012 (EDT)


I live in NJ not too far from you. How are you enjoying the weather? Look at the 10 day forecast. Is that not awesome?? I love warm weather. NSmith1 09:24, 20 March 2012 (EDT)