Changes

:::::::Just out of reasonable curiosity, you referred to this as a "nonprofit effort" - is it a legal non profit entity, or are you just covering the bills personally for now?  How will they be paid when CP has 100,000 entries and 50,000 hits a day? [[User:Human|Human]] 22:31, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

:::::::Just out of reasonable curiosity, you referred to this as a "nonprofit effort" - is it a legal non profit entity, or are you just covering the bills personally for now?  How will they be paid when CP has 100,000 entries and 50,000 hits a day? [[User:Human|Human]] 22:31, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

== [[User:AmesG|AmesG]]'s [[Conservapedia:Requests for adminship#AmesG|RfA]] ==

== [[User:AmesG|AmesG]]'s <nowiki>[[Conservapedia:Requests for adminship#AmesG|RfA]]</nowiki> ==

[[User:AmesG]] has had a successful RfA. His request has been in place since April 16, and the voting community has overwhelmingly given their support. Therefore, the consensus would seem to be to grant him sysop status, so, please do so. Thanks! --[[User:Hacker|Hacker]]^{<code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]])</code>} 16:53, 21 April 2007 (EDT)

[[User:AmesG]] has had a successful RfA. His request has been in place since April 16, and the voting community has overwhelmingly given their support. Therefore, the consensus would seem to be to grant him sysop status, so, please do so. Thanks! --[[User:Hacker|Hacker]]^{<code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]])</code>} 16:53, 21 April 2007 (EDT)

== Vote for Horace ==

== Vote for Horace ==

Aschlafly, I have put myself forward for sysopship and would very much appreciate your vote.  I have no doubt that you would be very excited to have me amongst the sysops, bringing my unique talents to bear.  Please don't be shy and feel free to leave a glowing endorsement as well if you feel so moved.  --[[User:Horace|Horace]] ^{[[Conservapedia:Requests_for_adminship#Support_2|Vote Horace for sysop]]} 22:21, 21 April 2007 (EDT)

Aschlafly, I have put myself forward for sysopship and would very much appreciate your vote.  I have no doubt that you would be very excited to have me amongst the sysops, bringing my unique talents to bear.  Please don't be shy and feel free to leave a glowing endorsement as well if you feel so moved.  --[[User:Horace|Horace]] <sup>Conservapedia:Requests_for_adminship#Support_2|Vote Horace for sysop]/sup> 22:21, 21 April 2007 (EDT)

==[[Douglas MacArthur]]==

==[[Douglas MacArthur]]==

This article has been vandalised by RSchalfy, and having reverted the article to contain his own ridiculous view of adultery to be only committed by women, locked the article.  If this isn't proof that this ludicrous "Trustworhy Encyclopedia" is a farce, I don't know what is.  I doubt you'll ban your own brother, but this deserves it.  50something. {{Unsigned|50something}}  

This article has been vandal<i></i>ised by RSchalfy, and having reverted the article to contain his own ridiculous view of adultery to be only committed by women, locked the article.  If this isn't proof that this ludicrous "Trustworhy Encyclopedia" is a farce, I don't know what is.  I doubt you'll ban your own brother, but this deserves it.  50something. {{Unsigned|50something}}  

:So the ''Washington Post'' trumps the Book of Leviticus, [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Adultery&diff=122101&oldid=122095] is that the argument?  [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:17, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

:So the ''Washington Post'' trumps the Book of Leviticus, [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Adultery&diff=122101&oldid=122095] is that the argument?  [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:17, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

Ask [[User:Vossy]] if he or she wants to be a Sysop. Vossy's [[Semite]] article is good and Vossy seems to have a very good temperament. Vossy also believes that there should be a conservative alternative to Wikipedia and thus supports Conservapedia's central mission. In addition, Vossy is on Conservapedia a fair amount.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:18, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

Ask [[User:Vossy]] if he or she wants to be a Sysop. Vossy's [[Semite]] article is good and Vossy seems to have a very good temperament. Vossy also believes that there should be a conservative alternative to Wikipedia and thus supports Conservapedia's central mission. In addition, Vossy is on Conservapedia a fair amount.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:18, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

:Will you recommend me too if I also write a fawning note on your talk page?  --[[User:Horace|Horace]] ^{[[Conservapedia:Requests_for_adminship#Support_2|Vote Horace for sysop]]} 19:21, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

:Will you recommend me too if I also write a fawning note on your talk page?  --[[User:Horace|Horace]] ^{Conservapedia:Requests_for_adminship#Support_2|Vote Horace for sysop} 19:21, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

::I looked at Vossy's edits and they seemed good. Vossy appears to support the idea of an alternative to Wikipedia which is the whole purpose of this project.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:10, 22 April 2007 (EDT)conservative

::I looked at Vossy's edits and they seemed good. Vossy appears to support the idea of an alternative to Wikipedia which is the whole purpose of this project.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:10, 22 April 2007 (EDT)conservative

:::Anyone who writes an article on this site supports the idea of an alternative to wikipedia.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 22:01, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Anyone who writes an article on this site supports the idea of an alternative to wikipedia.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 22:01, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Do you know, at least it makes a nice change to have you repsond to my posts. I suppose it's all a result of your campaign to become a bureaucrat. Once that decision has been made I guess that you will retreat back into your shell and refuse to engage anyone. I wont comment on the quality of Vossy's edits other than to say that I can see why you would like them. The challenge for you is not to like edits by someone who is ideologically aligned but to like the edits of someone who isn't. --[[User:Horace|Horace]] ^{[[Conservapedia:Requests_for_adminship#Support_2|Vote Horace for sysop]]} 22:04, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Do you know, at least it makes a nice change to have you repsond to my posts. I suppose it's all a result of your campaign to become a bureaucrat. Once that decision has been made I guess that you will retreat back into your shell and refuse to engage anyone. I wont comment on the quality of Vossy's edits other than to say that I can see why you would like them. The challenge for you is not to like edits by someone who is ideologically aligned but to like the edits of someone who isn't. --[[User:Horace|Horace]] ^{Conservapedia:Requests_for_adminship#Support_2|Vote Horace for sysop} 22:04, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

:Thanks again for the vote of confidence, Conservative. To be clear, I don't know that I would be engaged on the same level as some sysops here. My focus tends to center on article creation, wikification, and links. While I'd most appreciate the ability to move pages, I don't think I'd ever block anyone, unless it was clear vandalism. Regardless, I submit to the wisdom of those higher up. <font color="FF8700">[[User:Vossy|Vossy]]</font>^{<font color="CC0000">[[User_talk:Vossy|speak]]</font>} 23:48, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

:Thanks again for the vote of confidence, Conservative. To be clear, I don't know that I would be engaged on the same level as some sysops here. My focus tends to center on article creation, wikification, and links. While I'd most appreciate the ability to move pages, I don't think I'd ever block anyone, unless it was clear vandalism. Regardless, I submit to the wisdom of those higher up. <font color="FF8700">[[User:Vossy|Vossy]]</font>^{<font color="CC0000">[[User_talk:Vossy|speak]]</font>} 23:48, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

:::This is the claim we gotta check out from WP, ''The pericope is not found in any of the earliest surviving Gospel manuscripts; neither in the two 3rd century papyrus witnesses to John - P66 and P75; nor in the 4th century Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus.'' [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pericope_Adulter%C3%A6#Textual_History]  [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:53, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

:::This is the claim we gotta check out from WP, ''The pericope is not found in any of the earliest surviving Gospel manuscripts; neither in the two 3rd century papyrus witnesses to John - P66 and P75; nor in the 4th century Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus.'' [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pericope_Adulter%C3%A6#Textual_History]  [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:53, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

::::What, Andy, you're suggesting that the Bible is ''not'' to be taken literally?!? All sarcasm aside, why do you believe that this passage is falacious? I certainly don't. --[[User:Hacker|Hacker]]^{<code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]] • [[Conservapedia:Requests for adminship#Support|Support my RfA]])</code>} 18:12, 23 April 2007 (EDT)  

::::What, Andy, you're suggesting that the Bible is ''not'' to be taken literally?!? All sarcasm aside, why do you believe that this passage is falacious? I certainly don't. --[[User:Hacker|Hacker]]^{<code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]] • Conservapedia:Requests for adminship#Support|Support my RfA)</code>} 18:12, 23 April 2007 (EDT)  

::::: Liberals love the adultress passage, Hacker.  I think your comment proves my point!  Chalk it up to the same type of deception and vandalism we see in wikis today.  Evil and deceit existed then too.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:09, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

::::: Liberals love the adultress passage, Hacker.  I think your comment proves my point!  Chalk it up to the same type of deception and vandalism we see in wikis today.  Evil and deceit existed then too.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:09, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

::Thank you for the reply.  I’m sure it is not the first time you’ve had to respond to that particular poster and I applaud your restraint in letting him/her hang out here as long as you did—my concern was about the message that it sends to those who may be reading and not be aware of your past history with a poster (as I wasn’t).  I just wanted to alert you to the possibility that what you were saying may be misread.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 18:59, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

::Thank you for the reply.  I’m sure it is not the first time you’ve had to respond to that particular poster and I applaud your restraint in letting him/her hang out here as long as you did—my concern was about the message that it sends to those who may be reading and not be aware of your past history with a poster (as I wasn’t).  I just wanted to alert you to the possibility that what you were saying may be misread.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 18:59, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

Thanks, [[User:Hacker|Hacker]]^{<code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]] • [[Conservapedia:Requests for adminship#Support|Support my RfA]])</code>} 18:03, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

Thanks, [[User:Hacker|Hacker]]^{<code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]] • Conservapedia:Requests for adminship#Support|Support my RfA)</code>} 18:03, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

Review of Hacker's edits:  slightly less than 500 edits, of which only about 6 are new entries and only about 10 are substantive edits of existing entries.  One of the new entries was "Geek".  Unless this improves quickly, I'm going to propose blocking this account.  I will post this on [[Conservapedia:Abuse]] also.

Review of Hacker's edits:  slightly less than 500 edits, of which only about 6 are new entries and only about 10 are substantive edits of existing entries.  One of the new entries was "Geek".  Unless this improves quickly, I'm going to propose blocking this account.  I will post this on [[Conservapedia:Abuse]] also.