Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 51: Line 51:     
:::::It sounds good in theory, at least. I don't want us to just become "anti-Wikipedia" though, but rather a place where discussion like that isn't stifled. Rob is right to point out those examples...the Seth Rich article in particular stands out to me, because that information was heavily suppressed on numerous platforms. When our page went up, there seemed to be a lot of interest. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">DavidB4</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 20:50, 14 May 2021 (EDT)
 
:::::It sounds good in theory, at least. I don't want us to just become "anti-Wikipedia" though, but rather a place where discussion like that isn't stifled. Rob is right to point out those examples...the Seth Rich article in particular stands out to me, because that information was heavily suppressed on numerous platforms. When our page went up, there seemed to be a lot of interest. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">DavidB4</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 20:50, 14 May 2021 (EDT)
 +
 +
::::::We definitely should make articles for the Seth Rich article. Anything Wikipedia rejects is good for this site. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 21:04, 14 May 2021 (EDT)
Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
5,230

edits

Navigation menu