Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,789
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 278:
Line 278: + + + + + +
Conservapedia:Desk/Miscellany (view source)
Revision as of 03:51, April 1, 2008
, 03:51, April 1, 2008→A Call For Conservapedia's Rise to Activism: reply
I may be way off base in posting all of this, but I'm wondering, are there any plans like I'm describing already underway, or is this just beyond Conservapeida's priorities at this time? [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 22:33, 31 March 2008 (EDT)
I may be way off base in posting all of this, but I'm wondering, are there any plans like I'm describing already underway, or is this just beyond Conservapeida's priorities at this time? [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 22:33, 31 March 2008 (EDT)
: We welcome suggestions and criticisms but, frankly, I'm not sure what you're suggesting here. Your only example is our [[Obama]] entry, which you complain is "mostly biographical." But what else would one expect about a political candidate, particularly one who has no clear beliefs of his own?
: As to the supposedly great conservative blogs, I'm not sure what "precious intel" they are conveying that isn't in our entries. If you're referencing gossip, that's not going to make a difference and we're not going to waste time on it.
: We welcome your contributions, and perhaps in reviewing those we can learn what you have in mind. Thanks and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:51, 31 March 2008 (EDT)