104
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 7:
Line 7: + +
User talk:Puellanivis (view source)
Revision as of 00:22, December 4, 2007
, 00:22, December 4, 2007Appreciated, thanks
::Thank you for your contributions Puellanivis. However, a word of friendly advice - there is a 90%/10% talk/article philosophy here where editors are encouraged to contribute to articles, either new ones, or constructive edits to established ones, rather than engaging in extended debates. Although talk page debate is welcomed, we hope you will make other contributions to this site as well. [[User:BrianCo|BrianCo]] 18:52, 3 December 2007 (EST)
::Thank you for your contributions Puellanivis. However, a word of friendly advice - there is a 90%/10% talk/article philosophy here where editors are encouraged to contribute to articles, either new ones, or constructive edits to established ones, rather than engaging in extended debates. Although talk page debate is welcomed, we hope you will make other contributions to this site as well. [[User:BrianCo|BrianCo]] 18:52, 3 December 2007 (EST)
:::I do often contribute to this site as much as I am able to, however as some of my views are outside of the american conservative views, some of my edits, even short ones, are deemed so inappropriate that the article is simply deleted. For this reason, I was told to discuss changes in the talk page before simply editing the article directly. Regardless of my bias, or your bias, I am here simply to ensure that certain opposing views are not treated as strawmen to be easily defeated. If those views are liberal or conservative does not matter to me, but if misrepresenting a topic, means you fail to actually represent the opposing view, then no one will be convinced, but rather they will simply affirm; either a liberal would go off saying "pff... facist lies", while for conservatives you're preaching to the choir. If an argument is presented such that neither side can reasonably call it lies, or misrepresentative then the argument becomes stronger and stronger. Every convincing article demonstrates that Conservapedia is truthful, and honest, rather than simply a choir-preaching sandbox. --[[User:Puellanivis|Puellanivis]] 19:22, 3 December 2007 (EST)