111
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 136:
Line 136: − + + + + +
Conservapedia talk:Commandments (view source)
Revision as of 16:32, October 22, 2008
, 16:32, October 22, 2008→Amendment Recommendation
2) info that will help us bring damage to and discredit the left's ideas and ambitions.
2) info that will help us bring damage to and discredit the left's ideas and ambitions.
Any info which lies outside of these two categories may be interesting, and even accurate; but why would it belong in Conservapedia? I mean, are we seriously trying to compete with Wikipedia as some alternative yet "neutral" warehouse of encyclopedic info? I mean, it'd be great if I saw an article on here about how to change a tire or the chemical composition of a sponge. But of course, given the name, this would seem to be a big waste of effort, given our limited resources. Perhaps we can amend the Commandments to direct all future efforts to allow only the two categories of info I just mentioned? If there's a third that's equally important, I'd like to hear what that is. I'm open to revisions... [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 12:15, 22 October 2008 (EDT)
Any info which lies outside of these two categories may be interesting, and even accurate; but why would it belong in Conservapedia? I mean, are we seriously trying to compete with Wikipedia as some alternative yet "neutral" warehouse of encyclopedic info? I mean, it'd be great if I saw an article on here about how to change a tire or the chemical composition of a sponge. But of course, given the name, this would seem to be a big waste of effort, given our limited resources.
More to the point, suppose there is a "neutral" topic which describes a dishonorable practice. And in that topic, we catalog all the instances the left have engaged in this dishonorable practice. Suppose further that an obviously left-wing contributor adds info to that article which is intended to bring damage to (and attempts to discredit) the conservative cause. In the interest of "neutrality," I suppose we could simply just leave it there. But then what interest would that serve for our readers? If much of the content we see in the web is already aimed at diminishing the conservative view, what obligates Conservapedia to follow suit in that trend?
Perhaps we can amend the Commandments to direct all future efforts to allow only the two categories of info I just mentioned? If there's a third that's equally important, I'd like to hear what that is. I'm open to revisions... [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 12:15, 22 October 2008 (EDT)