| Line 57: |
Line 57: |
| | | | |
| | : Good point, as far as I can tell. It was not my edit. I've removed the ISO 8601 reference per your suggestion.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:18, 19 May 2008 (EDT) | | : Good point, as far as I can tell. It was not my edit. I've removed the ISO 8601 reference per your suggestion.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:18, 19 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | == Commentary on and around "Dear Aschlafly," == |
| | + | |
| | + | ''[sorry if this seems peevish, but this is already a huge file to manipulate when editing, so I've added a section break for comments surrounding our conversation.]]'' |
| | + | |
| | + | ''Liberals'' tend to cut off and censor debate while ''conservatives'' don’t? I’m not so sure about that. Take a look: |
| | + | |
| | + | [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Mystery:Young_Hollywood_Breast_Cancer_Victims&diff=457003&oldid=456996] |
| | + | [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Mystery:Young_Hollywood_Breast_Cancer_Victims&diff=next&oldid=457569] |
| | + | [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Mystery:Young_Hollywood_Breast_Cancer_Victims&diff=next&oldid=458814] |
| | + | |
| | + | [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3Acfred] |
| | + | [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3Afaustus] |
| | + | [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3AdonaldG] |
| | + | |
| | + | And that’s just from one debate. Of course, the ultimate irony will be when this is reverted (i.e. censored) and my account is blocked (Hi Karajou!) which I’m sure will be in a matter of seconds. Or you could practice what you preach and allow this to stay, maybe even reply, and unblock my account. You can see I haven’t vandalized, I use a proxy because it seems half the IPs in the world have been blocked. But it’s your site and you can do what you want. I am more than happy to participate in an honest and polite debate (and even to contribute some neutral, factual, apolitical content to this site, which it could use) but don’t pretend conservatives don’t censor debate while simultaneously censoring someone who tries to debate that very fact. It’s unbecoming. [[User:Jaguar|Jaguar]] 10:55, 23 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | :If you want to contribute by adding "neutral, factual, apolitical content" to the site, then do it. Don't wax nostalgic about what you could do, right? Are you waiting for fanfare first? [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 11:07, 23 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | ::To be honest, I expected to be blocked by now, but seeing as I'm not (yet) I will get started. Now, if someone does take it upon themselves to block me for merely using a proxy, will you unblock me so I can continue what I start? [[User:Jaguar|Jaguar]] 11:16, 23 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | :::I will not override the decisions of another Sysop. Obviously adding worthwhile content will make you less likely to be blocked. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 11:21, 23 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | ::::[http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/TClarke Oh] [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:TClarke Really?] [[User:Jaguar|Jaguar]] 13:34, 23 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | ::::: "Jaguar", we have clear [[rule]]s against sockpuppets and it's tiresome when [[liberals]] don't curb abuse by (or even criticize) other [[liberals]]. You're not using your real name, you're apparently not using your own IP address, and you're not recognizing vandalism by liberals. Why not wear a ski mask also??? Say something intelligent and people will listen here. Continue to whine on my talk page and I'll block your account.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:12, 23 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | ::::::I'm not really sure how exactly I'm supposed to "curb abuse" by liberals or anyone else. I'm just a lowly sort-of editor here with a sword of Damocles hanging over my head, probably one talk page post away from an permanent block. I have no powers to do anything beyond revert vandalism on this site, should I happen to see it. And I'm willing to do that. I find it odd that you seem so certain I refuse to criticize liberals. I've made about 5 talk pages posts here and I guess I have not criticized liberals, I haven't defended them ''en masse'', and I haven't criticized Satanists, Nazis, Scientologists, rapists, child abusers, etc., either. Does that indicate that I refuse to? Sure, undoubtedly liberals have vandalized this site. Shame on them. But I have also pointed out several cases of people being banned and having their comments reverted in ongoing debates when they have not vandalized or broken rules, as well as an example of a username blocked when the only edits have been starting new useful articles (if the editor is a vandal or the edits are bad, should not [[William Proxmire]] and [[Eamon de Valera]] be deleted?). I just find it odd when liberals are said to censor debate, while conservatives thrive on it when several debates here have been (for lack of a better word) censored by conservatives. As for my username, true, it is not my real name. Most users, it seems, do not use their real names here, and while there is a rule against "frivolous" usernames, I really don't think this one qualifies. It's an noble animal and a fine car. I can hardly think of anything less offensive. So that's it. Call it "whining" if you like; it doesn't faze me. I'll get back to editing now. It seems geography is generally uncontroversial area which can use more entries. Feel free to let me know if any of these contributions have problems. [[User:Jaguar|Jaguar]] 21:59, 23 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | So what if he doesn't use his real name? Many users (And Sysops) on this website do not. That seems a bit like a [[Double Standard]], something that [[Liberals]] have a monopoly on, or so it seems from reading this site. [[User:JEdgar|JEdgar]] 17:11, 23 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | :Um, Andy's not referring to usernames (e.g. Jaguar, JEdgar, Jinxmchue) but the name you are required to enter upon signing up. Jaguar probably signed up with "Joe Blow" or something else obviously fake. Did you enter a fake name, too, JEdgar? [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 21:43, 23 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | ::Um, you're not required to enter a name upon signing up. --[[User:HHCrippen|HHCrippen]] 00:50, 24 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | :::Um, actually, you are. If you go to the "Create account" page, it asks for username, password, email and ''real name''. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 11:45, 24 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | ::::The real name is optional. '''[[user:FernoKlump|<font color="#000066" >FernoKlump</font>]]''' 13:18, 24 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | ---- |
| | + | |
| | + | ''Conservative girls do not have a high demand for guys who adhere to a [[liberal]] belief system.'' We've got [[Liberal friendship]], perhaps someone should start [[Conservative relationships]]... [[User:StatsMsn|StatsMsn]] 05:46, 21 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | I cant imagine liberal guys wanting much to do with a conservative girl anyway. And Az (john) and phillip rayment, I think you are right on the money. Many people have may various beliefs and ideas and one cannot be said to be better than the other or ''more right''. |
| | + | I also find it interesting that the US with its looser gun laws has more gun crime than Australia and NZ with their tight laws. |
| | + | [[User:AdenJ|AdenJ]] 06:41, 21 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | :There is some line of cognitive dissonance involved in automatically blocking anybody who makes liberal arguments, but it is understandable for one who pays for a website's bandwidth not to want to run up the bandwidth up with debates when the debating is peripheral to the main purpose of the website. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 15:21, 23 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | :: This page is currently 59 kb in size (or so the link at the top said). Following [[:Image:6a00d8345160cc69e200e54f79d1a78834-640wi.gif|this]] link will give you something about half the size of the page and [[:Image:Keldaby goats.jpg|this]] link will give you something 5x larger than the current talk page. The blocking anyone who makes an argument from a liberal point of view seems to be... odd. The original design for the wiki software was a collaboration tool. Most wikis out there are about collaborative work - and collaboration requires discussion to come to agreement on what is there. Wikipedia just happens to be an encyclopedia built on top of collaboration software. It seems odd for a page with content in a wiki to be locked down and people blocked for attempting to collaborate (not everyone understands the issues in the same way as the idealized conservative viewpoint). The best way to control who/what is on a talk page is to increase the barrier to entry rather than censoring the arguments and blocking the users. This would likely also reduce the workload on the administrators and allow them to create quality articles that would set examples for how the rest of the site should look instead of blocking nearly every user that creates an account. --[[User:Rutm|Rutm]] 15:49, 23 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | I'm not saying I agree or disagree, only stating that I can understand such actions. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 16:17, 23 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | :::Agreement is not required, if some of the "contributors" oppose the goals of the project. We require liberals to refrain from making ideological edits: they (like us) may only enter trustworthy information. |
| | + | |
| | + | :::Users are not blocked for "collaboration" but for breaking down the collaborative process. Instead of working with us, they work against us. Some arguments are unproductive. |
| | + | |
| | + | :::What I'd like to see from advocates of liberal ideas is not simply to assert that these ideas are true - but to identify the spokesmen who most prominently advocate the ideas. Also, to give the reasons (if any) that the spokesmen and defenders of these ideas put forth in their support. |
| | + | |
| | + | :::Don't waste our time trying to turn each article into a sort of blog entry. That will just get your account blocked again. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 15:59, 23 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | :::: One can read further up on this page (and others) to see a difference in opinions on gun control. Noting that you take issue with climate change, a quick look at http://www.christiansandclimate.org/ or http://www.creationcare.org/ and you will see a group that would be considered social conservative Christians who disagree with the stance that you take. When an article is loaded with bias the question is how does one fix it? The general response appears to be "thats the way its going to be - block anyone who disagrees." Every alternative viewpoint counter to the one given by becomes recast in a negative light. There is a deep cognitive dissonance in claiming that someone trying to add material that does not agree with makes it into a blog while the original article figuratively drips with the author's own bias. --[[User:Rutm|Rutm]] 17:03, 23 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | :::To be honest, I think there's a certain level of cognitive dissonance involved in attempting to post to a site with a clearly-identified ideology, and then being in any way surprised or offended when ideas that are contrary to that ideology are not accepted. It seems a bit like walking up to a cage with a label that says "If You Put Your Fingers Through The Bars, You'll Get Bitten"--and then being surprised when putting a finger through the bars results in getting bitten. |
| | + | |
| | + | :::I don't agree with all of Mr. Schlafly's viewpoints, or those of the SysOps here. However, I acknowledge that this is their site, specifically created to give them a place to express those views. As such, I regard myself in much the same way I would if I were a visitor in someone else's house, and endeavor to conduct myself accordingly. |
| | + | |
| | + | :::--[[User:Benp|Benp]] 16:11, 23 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | ==Springing forth with a new bunch of articles== |
| | + | |
| | + | [[Materialism and science]], |
| | + | [[Darwinism and materialism]], |
| | + | [[Atheism and science]], |
| | + | [[Evolution and religion]], |
| | + | [[Science and motivation]], |
| | + | [[Intelligent design of life]], |
| | + | [[Hydrocarbon use]], |
| | + | [[Sea level increase]], |
| | + | [[Availability of guns]], |
| | + | [[Boorstin]], |
| | + | [[Glacier shortening]], |
| | + | [[History of Sexuality]], |
| | + | [[Feminist theory]], |
| | + | [[Sam Dash]], |
| | + | [[Uncle Tom]], |
| | + | [[Snowflake]], |
| | + | [[Mole (espionage)]], |
| | + | [[Outdoor art]], |
| | + | [[History of painting]], |
| | + | [[Random number]] --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 19:36, 21 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | :Awesome, Ed! Hope you can make our June 5th special event!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:34, 21 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | == Categories == |
| | + | |
| | + | Hello, I was going through the list of "red" categories to see if I could fix any, and I wanted to change the non-working category of "journals" in the page: http://www.conservapedia.com/British_Medical_Journal to the established category: http://www.conservapedia.com/Category:Medical_Journals - but this article is "protected" - if someone could please be so kind as to temporarily "unprotect" this page so I can change the category, or if someone else could change it, I would appreciate it, thanks! (and if there is a better place to leave this type of request in the future, please do let me know, so I'll not be cluttering your talk page up with requests). -- [[User:Taj|Taj]] 10:21, 22 May 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | : Done as requested. I don't know why it was protected. Thanks, Taj, for your efforts. {{unsigned|Aschlafly}} |
| | + | |
| | + | :: Thank you very much. I'm just going through uncategorized pages list right now, to see if I can help out in anything, if there's anything better you need done please don't hesitate to ask. :) -- [[User:Taj|Taj]] 10:31, 22 May 2008 (EDT) |