17,394
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 59:
Line 59: − + + + + + + +
what sabotage looks like
::::Freedom of speech does not equal sabotage, especially on this encyclopedia. You invented and inserted a whole string of falsehoods that if any CP reader saw them and trusted them would make our reader looks like a total idiot. The question remains: how much other sabotage have you inserted that we have not noticed? The notion that deliberate deception of our readers is "an open-minded search for the truth" is a disruptive attack on the concept of a trustworthy encyclopeda. One more outburst and you get permanently banned as disruptive. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 01:06, 9 November 2009 (EST)
::::Freedom of speech does not equal sabotage, especially on this encyclopedia. You invented and inserted a whole string of falsehoods that if any CP reader saw them and trusted them would make our reader looks like a total idiot. The question remains: how much other sabotage have you inserted that we have not noticed? The notion that deliberate deception of our readers is "an open-minded search for the truth" is a disruptive attack on the concept of a trustworthy encyclopeda. One more outburst and you get permanently banned as disruptive. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 01:06, 9 November 2009 (EST)
:::::I understand your logic for deleting my entries based on the notion that, if I had vandalized, than I may have quite possibly done the same with my other edits. But without even reading my edits or the articles that you were deleting, you just zapped them from existence. In all reasonableness, you could have just as easily deleted my edit and I would have taken the hint, gone back and thought through what I added with a more critical discourse. But you didn't do that. Regardless, that problem was solved and is in the past, so now I'd really like to know what part of my edit in the [[Obama administration]] article (what caused you to ban me) that was wrong? Was it adding more czars to the list? If that's the case, you're wrong. We all know there are more czars than what is currently in the article. So what part of my edit was vandalism--what is it that you referred to as purely "imagination?" [[User:DerekE|DerekE]] 01:25, 9 November 2009 (EST)
:::::I understand your logic for deleting my entries based on the notion that, if I had vandalized, than I may have quite possibly done the same with my other edits. But without even reading my edits or the articles that you were deleting, you just zapped them from existence. In all reasonableness, you could have just as easily deleted my edit and I would have taken the hint, gone back and thought through what I added with a more critical discourse. But you didn't do that. Regardless, that problem was solved and is in the past, so now I'd really like to know what part of my edit in the [[Obama administration]] article (what caused you to ban me) that was wrong? Was it adding more czars to the list? If that's the case, you're wrong. We all know there are more czars than what is currently in the article. So what part of my edit was vandalism--what is it that you referred to as purely "imagination?" [[User:DerekE|DerekE]] 01:25, 9 November 2009 (EST)
:Derek wants examples of what he did wrong. OK, here are some of the edits he added to the [[Obama Administration]] article on Nov. 3; he apparentlyu cut and pasted from an anonymous email message with no effort to verify even the most basic facts:
::::''' Afghanistan Czar Richard Holbrooke Ultra liberal anti-gun former Gov. of New Mexico. Pro Abortion and legal drug use.''' false and malicious statements about a real diplomat who was never a governor.
::::''' California Water Czar David J. Hayes Sr. Fellow of radical environmentalist group, "Progress Policy." No training or experience in water management.''' False statement about a prominent expert on water policy; there is no "Progress Policy" group.
::::'''Drug Czar: Gil Kerlikowske; devoted lobbyist for every restrictive gun law proposal, Former Chief of Police in Liberal Seattle. Believes no American should own a firearm. Supports legalization of drugs''' false nonsense. (he actually said, any drug 'legalization' would be "waving the white flag", "legalization is off the the charts when it comes to discussion, from my viewpoint" and that "legalization vocabulary doesn't exist for me and it was made clear that it doesn't exist in President Obama's vocabulary." Specifically about marijuana, he said, "It's a dangerous drug")
::::'''Homeland Security Czar John Brennan Anti CIA activist. No training in diplomatic or government affairs. Believes Open Borders to Mexico and a dialog with terrorists and has suggested Obama disband US military.''' Unbelievable. Let's quote our own CP entry: "He served in the administration of George W. Bush, where Brennan has generally used strong means to ensure the safety of Americans, and was an architect of the interrogation techniques criticized by many liberals." (from [[John Brennan]])
::::'''Faith Based Czar Joshua DuBois Political Black activist (Degree in Black Nationalism), seeks a separate black nation. Anti-gun ownership lobbyist.''' all nonsense. he's the one who brought Obama on Rick Warren's Presidential Forum. The list of DerekE's additions goes on and on. All with no regard to the truth or the damage it will do to CP. That's worse than incompetence, it's sabotage. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 02:24, 9 November 2009 (EST)
==Vernon Davis==
==Vernon Davis==
I have restored. Thanks for the vote of confidence. RJ is a good man, try avoiding contacting him. You da man! --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 15:02, 6 November 2009 (EST)
I have restored. Thanks for the vote of confidence. RJ is a good man, try avoiding contacting him. You da man! --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 15:02, 6 November 2009 (EST)
:Thanks! I promise to avoid him at all costs. I realize his intentions are in the best interest of Conservapedia, and nothing personal against me. I'll also keep in mind that he is and has much more authority than I do, and he is in fact a very renowned user within [[Conservapedia]]. For that I do respect him and his wisdom as a positive, influential member of the community. [[User:DerekE|DerekE]] 15:52, 6 November 2009 (EST)
:Thanks! I promise to avoid him at all costs. I realize his intentions are in the best interest of Conservapedia, and nothing personal against me. I'll also keep in mind that he is and has much more authority than I do, and he is in fact a very renowned user within [[Conservapedia]]. For that I do respect him and his wisdom as a positive, influential member of the community. [[User:DerekE|DerekE]] 15:52, 6 November 2009 (EST)