1,767
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 7:
Line 7: + +
Conservapedia talk:Keep Richard Around? (view source)
Revision as of 13:00, March 28, 2007
, 13:00, March 28, 2007→'''Block:'''
*While you might not think you are a Liberal, you are perhaps a Libertarian, and certainly nothing "wrong" with that. If you had done what you had, posted it only here, or sent it to the Sysop's, Bureaucrats and Andy, you would have had more credibility. You joined a site, and a reading you could have told you all you needed to know about Andy and his family, you knew his positions. But you joined anyway, without force. Then you boasted publicly about it, got a laugh, and preened about how slick you were. Given those "qualifications" I might employ you in some campaign for dirty tricks, but you shouldn't have a position of trust. By the way, I knew Ronald Reagan for over twenty years. He never would have approved such dishonesty, it would have turned his stomach. --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] <sup>[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]</sup> 08:47, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
*While you might not think you are a Liberal, you are perhaps a Libertarian, and certainly nothing "wrong" with that. If you had done what you had, posted it only here, or sent it to the Sysop's, Bureaucrats and Andy, you would have had more credibility. You joined a site, and a reading you could have told you all you needed to know about Andy and his family, you knew his positions. But you joined anyway, without force. Then you boasted publicly about it, got a laugh, and preened about how slick you were. Given those "qualifications" I might employ you in some campaign for dirty tricks, but you shouldn't have a position of trust. By the way, I knew Ronald Reagan for over twenty years. He never would have approved such dishonesty, it would have turned his stomach. --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] <sup>[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]</sup> 08:47, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
::Conservapedia needed a public slap in the face. Heck, even now, Andy is all smug and pretends that nothing is wrong. This thing should have started a serious debate among sysops (You guys are supposed to be examples for the community, yet what happened last night? Some of the "liberals that should be monitored" were engaging in a constructive discussion about improving the site policies while you and Karajou were whining about him having lied. Not even to mention your utterly pointless protection/block war.) about things like security, reaction and rules. Instead, "you" (read: the sysop collective, and especially Andy) seem to consider the case to be closed (with the exception of your ominous discussion about "certain people" being warned and stuff - may I ask who you guys meant? I hope that the idiot who nominated me for Richard's list is one of them!).
::Right now, your main concern should not be to gloat at a banned user who can't reply. It should be how to handle the fact that several good contributors are leaving the site in disgust. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 09:00, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
=='''Keep:''' ==
=='''Keep:''' ==