9
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 530:
Line 530: + +
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 03:38, March 12, 2007
, 03:38, March 12, 2007→Wikipedia six times more liberal than public?
:: Sorry, the math is really incorrect. It doesn't serve you well to label everybody who points to wrong math as ''liberal''. A valid point (bias in Wikipedia) is tainted by invalid math, especially when combined with calling names to settle a mathematical dispute. This point is just a red herring, and will do nothing than give people an opportunity to ridicule Conservapedia and its editors. There is nothing wrong with droppoing this point, since everybody knows that Wikipedia has a liberal bias. [[User:Order|Order]] 10:55, 12 March 2007 (AEST)
:: Sorry, the math is really incorrect. It doesn't serve you well to label everybody who points to wrong math as ''liberal''. A valid point (bias in Wikipedia) is tainted by invalid math, especially when combined with calling names to settle a mathematical dispute. This point is just a red herring, and will do nothing than give people an opportunity to ridicule Conservapedia and its editors. There is nothing wrong with droppoing this point, since everybody knows that Wikipedia has a liberal bias. [[User:Order|Order]] 10:55, 12 March 2007 (AEST)
::: Exactly. If someone who agrees with my political philosophy is using obviously incorrect logic to prove their point, that makes me look worse by comparison. The math is incorrect, and saying that is isn't make it so.
==Item 12==
==Item 12==