Changes

Conservapedia's server experienced a serious storm of sporadic server outages.  Cons weighed in with the advice "get a faster browser", and was totally shot down by knowledgeable people—AugustO, Bringreaganback, MelH, and myself.  I explained in great detail why Cons's theories were incorrect.  Cons thrashed around for a bit, and then cited an article in [https://askleo.com/whats_an_internal_server_error_and_how_do_i_fix_it/ the "askleo" web site].  He attempted to make that web site seem authoritative by citing its Alexa rank of about 25,000.  This isn't necessary; any technically literate person can look at the web site and see for himself that Leo knows what he is talking about.  Alexa ranks don't make a site more authoritative.  And that's a good thing, because Conservapedia's rank is about 105,000.  (By the way, ritionalwaki's rank is about 23,000, a little better than askleo.)

Conservapedia's server experienced a serious storm of sporadic server outages.  Cons weighed in with the advice "get a faster browser", and was totally shot down by knowledgeable people—AugustO, Bringreaganback, MelH, and myself.  I explained in great detail why Cons's theories were incorrect.  Cons thrashed around for a bit, and then cited an article in [https://askleo.com/whats_an_internal_server_error_and_how_do_i_fix_it/ the "askleo" web site].  He attempted to make that web site seem authoritative by citing its Alexa rank of about 25,000.  This isn't necessary; any technically literate person can look at the web site and see for himself that Leo knows what he is talking about.  Alexa ranks don't make a site more authoritative.  And that's a good thing, because Conservapedia's rank is about 105,000.  (By the way, ritionalwaki's rank is about 23,000, a little better than askleo.)

Leo says that he is very familiar with the error.  In the article, he ''repeatedly'' says that it's a server error, not affected by anything the user might do.  Finally, in the "some straws to grasp at" section, he mentions some things that a user might do, including trying a different (not faster; different) browser.  But he makes clear that those are very far-fetched scenarios.

Leo says that he is very familiar with the error.  In the article, he ''repeatedly'' says that it's a server error, not affected by anything the user might do.  Finally, in the "some straws to grasp at" section, he mentions some things that a user might do, <big>'''including trying a different (not faster; different) browser.'''</big> But he makes clear that those are very far-fetched scenarios.

So, no, Cons.  There is no need for me to apologize.

So, no, Cons.  There is no need for me to apologize.