14
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 253:
Line 253: + +
Talk:Homosexual Agenda (view source)
Revision as of 21:04, February 22, 2013
, 21:04, February 22, 2013→The concept of a homosexual agenda
:Here's the [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&action=historysubmit&diff=1035658&oldid=1035638 diff] of Markman reverting this user's edits. Mikers is right that at least some of the sentences he deleted are in clear violation of Conservapedia guidelines. [[User:Onestone|Onestone]] 13:07, 22 February 2013 (EST)
:Here's the [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexual_Agenda&action=historysubmit&diff=1035658&oldid=1035638 diff] of Markman reverting this user's edits. Mikers is right that at least some of the sentences he deleted are in clear violation of Conservapedia guidelines. [[User:Onestone|Onestone]] 13:07, 22 February 2013 (EST)
One last point, Ed. In the message you sent me you stated that I should not hesitate to point out editorial problems with conservapedia as long as I avoid inflammatory language. However when I pointed out editorial problems with this page and edited the page to resolve them, I was immediately blocked. There does not seem to be a way to appeal blocks and without an appeals process, conservapedia does not encourage the free exchange of ideas which it claims to be encouraging. There should be a mechanism for appealing and complaining about those members who arbitrarily block users who simply disagree with ideology or because they point out serious problems with articles (such as lack of evidence or citations to back up personal opinions presented as fact in violation of conservapedia commandments 1 and 5). It would seem to be impossible to point out members who inappropriately block users without creating a different acount which is a violation of conservapedia policy. It seems that the conservapedia system is constructed to prevent fair and thoughtful challenges to articles which present personal opinion as fact without evidence or challenges to facts presented in the articles. What would you suggest a user do if he or she is blocked simply for making a reasonable edit to a page? What would you suggest for a user who believes that he or she was inappropriately blocked by a user without sufficient basis? Thanks in advance for your imput.