Changes

#As strong of a '''nay''' as one could possibly nay [[User:TerryB|TerryB]] 15:22, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#As strong of a '''nay''' as one could possibly nay [[User:TerryB|TerryB]] 15:22, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay, in the strongest possible terms.  If those in power are held to the rules that others must follow then a just society will always emerge.  If, however, those in authority are allowed to run rampage unchecked, then [http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=327929 this] is the inevitable result.  Chaos, corruption and an organisation that can no longer function.--[[User:IeuanApGriffith|IeuanApGriffith]] 15:34, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay, in the strongest possible terms.  If those in power are held to the rules that others must follow then a just society will always emerge.  If, however, those in authority are allowed to run rampage unchecked, then [http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=327929 this] is the inevitable result.  Chaos, corruption and an organisation that can no longer function.--[[User:IeuanApGriffith|IeuanApGriffith]] 15:34, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay.  The only thing that will save this wiki as a conservative sight on the internet is Robs's proposals.  Lose them and this wiki will go the way TK wanted.  Rein in conservative and karajou and this project may JUST be saved. [[User:Davidspencer|Davidspencer]] 15:37, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay.  The only thing that will save this wiki as a conservative sight on the internet is Robs's proposals.  Lose them and this wiki will go the way TK wanted.  {{personal remark removed}}. [[User:Davidspencer|Davidspencer]] 15:37, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#RobS is a reasonable fellow and is only trying to improve the wiki.  He is the only sysop campaigning in the face of User:conservative's abusive habits of shutting down discussion by

#RobS is a reasonable fellow and is only trying to improve the wiki.  He is the only sysop campaigning in the face of {{personal remark removed}}.

#:As a result of this, User:conservative has become quite upset at being called out and instead of changing his ways is lashing out at RobS- which normally works fine except that RobS is also a sysop and thus can unblock himself and restore commentary.  Worst of all RobS is capable of committing the horrific crime of posting on User:conservative's talk page.

#:It is in Conservapedia's best interests to let Rob keep his rights and march by his side as he strives to improve the community and its interactions.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 15:59, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#:It is in Conservapedia's best interests to let Rob keep his rights and march by his side as he strives to improve the community and its interactions.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 15:59, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay. RobS is working to improve the site (while keeping its conservative POV), Conservative to protect his petty fiefdom. [[User:GuidoF|Guy]]^{[[User_talk:GuidoF|message me]]} 16:09, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay. RobS is working to improve the site (while keeping its conservative POV), {{personal remark removed}}. [[User:GuidoF|Guy]]^{[[User_talk:GuidoF|message me]]} 16:09, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay.  This has gone too far. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|^Hello!]] 16:59, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay.  This has gone too far. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|^Hello!]] 16:59, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay.  If Rob were to lose his rights it would be a victory for the parodists and the bullies.  --[[User:JarradD|JarradD]] 17:14, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay.  If Rob were to lose his rights it would be a victory for the parodists and the bullies.  --[[User:JarradD|JarradD]] 17:14, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#There needs to be some sysop accountability. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:25, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#There needs to be some sysop accountability. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:25, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Definitely not. RobS: Reasonable sysop who is trying to bring some accountability and respect. Conserative: An internet bully, who populates the site with substandard quote mined insults written in crude inelegant language. --[[User:Orsay|Orsay]] 17:54, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Definitely not. RobS: Reasonable sysop who is trying to bring some accountability and respect. {{personal remark removed}} --[[User:Orsay|Orsay]] 17:54, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay. I know I said I wouldn't edit this site again following its exploitation of recent events, but for this purpose I will briefly renege on that. RobSmith is the only sysop who is making a concerted effort to improve this site by implementing a set of coherent policies. His opponents are those who have most frequently abused their rights as sysops. Most notable among these is User: Conservative, whose numerous talk page comments and 'essays' are, if not parody, then a genuine cause for concern, and I would in all seriousness advise his fellow sysops to discretely speak with this user regarding this matter. The other vocal opponent of RobSmith is FergusE, who is very clearly a parodist here only to stir things up. [[User:WilliamB1|WilliamB1]] 18:41, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay. I know I said I wouldn't edit this site again following its exploitation of recent events, but for this purpose I will briefly renege on that. RobSmith is the only sysop who is making a concerted effort to improve this site by implementing a set of coherent policies. His opponents are those who have most frequently abused their rights as sysops. Most notable among these is User: Conservative, whose numerous talk page comments and 'essays' are, if not parody, then a genuine cause for concern, and I would in all seriousness advise his fellow sysops to discretely speak with this user regarding this matter. The other vocal opponent of RobSmith is FergusE, who is very clearly a parodist here only to stir things up. [[User:WilliamB1|WilliamB1]] 18:41, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#I think it is wrong for one sysop to openly campaign against another, especially when it is based on the other only wanting to help the site. As conservatives we should expect accountability and transparency from those who run the site in the same way that we expect it of our government. The wielding of anonymous and unaccountable power is what one expects from Marxists. [[User:KarenWu|KarenWu]] 19:40, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#I think it is wrong for one sysop to openly campaign against another, especially when it is based on the other only wanting to help the site. As conservatives we should expect accountability and transparency from those who run the site in the same way that we expect it of our government. The wielding of anonymous and unaccountable power is what one expects from Marxists. [[User:KarenWu|KarenWu]] 19:40, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay. As far as I can see, Rob hasn't done anything to merit losing his Sysop rights. --[[User:MatthewQ|MatthewQ]] 19:53, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay. As far as I can see, Rob hasn't done anything to merit losing his Sysop rights. --[[User:MatthewQ|MatthewQ]] 19:53, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay. This site needs more like Rob. [[User:EricAlstrom|EricAlstrom]] 20:12, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay. This site needs more like Rob. [[User:EricAlstrom|EricAlstrom]] 20:12, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay. RobS is one of the few people on here in power who is consistently calling for sysop accountability, something that is vital to a collaborative project like this. While I certainly do not support everything he does on here, not including this current issue, it is night and day compared to the nothingness that Conservative and his "articles" bring to this encyclopedia. This is a case of sour grapes from Conservative since he is the main culprit of sysop abuse currently. [[User:Ameda|ameda]] 21:58, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#Nay. RobS is one of the few people on here in power who is consistently calling for sysop accountability, something that is vital to a collaborative project like this. While I certainly do not support everything he does on here, not including this current issue, it is night and day compared to the nothingness that Conservative and his "articles" bring to this encyclopedia. {{personal remark removed}} [[User:Ameda|ameda]] 21:58, 31 July 2011 (EDT)

#No. He is a diligent and attentive administrator, as far as I am aware.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 07:13, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

#No. He is a diligent and attentive administrator, as far as I am aware.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 07:13, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

#No. RobS seems to be primarily promoting discussion about the Rules and Guidelines of this site and the accountability of administrators to those guidelines. [[User:CharlieJ|CharlieJ]] 09:08, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

#No. RobS seems to be primarily promoting discussion about the Rules and Guidelines of this site and the accountability of administrators to those guidelines. [[User:CharlieJ|CharlieJ]] 09:08, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

#No. This started out as a simple request from one admin to another for the latter to be more accommodating in the spirit of a wiki. user:Conservative has acted in a manner unbecoming of a sysop, dragging the debate across several pages, including - ironically - Mr. Schlafly's, whilst insisting that people cannot post on his talk page. If anybody deserves censure out of this, it is user:Conservative - he blows a simple request totally out of proportion, divides the sysop body and suddenly runs away - again! - claiming he is "very busy." Somebody this irresponsible should not be in a position of authority. [[User:TracyS|TracyS]] 10:12, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

#No. This started out as a simple request from one admin to another for the latter to be more accommodating in the spirit of a wiki. user:Conservative has acted in a manner unbecoming of a sysop, dragging the debate across several pages, including - ironically - Mr. Schlafly's, whilst insisting that people cannot post on his talk page. {{personal remark removed}} [[User:TracyS|TracyS]] 10:12, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

#No. {{personal remark removed}}  User:RobS is correct in attempting to discipline him. {{unsigned|JanW}}

#No. {{personal remark removed}}  User:RobS is correct in attempting to discipline him. {{unsigned|JanW}}