Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
293,004
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 20:
Line 20: + + + + + + + + + + +
Undo revision 899295 by Jcw (talk)
*Liberals like to pretend that they are blameless, while blaming everyone else. Just like the guy in Oslo the other week. Well, peddle it somewhere else, you're not fooling anyone here.
*Liberals like to pretend that they are blameless, while blaming everyone else. Just like the guy in Oslo the other week. Well, peddle it somewhere else, you're not fooling anyone here.
*If you really want to make contributions you (or the RW "neighbors") are always free to do so. You need not bother to keep up the pretense of persecuted rationality any more. Rational people do what is requested and keep their promises. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 18:09, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
*If you really want to make contributions you (or the RW "neighbors") are always free to do so. You need not bother to keep up the pretense of persecuted rationality any more. Rational people do what is requested and keep their promises. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 18:09, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
::Ed, your Writing Plan policy comes over as nothing but "You didn't break the rules, but I still would like to have an excuse to ban you, so follow my orders ''or else''." You single-handedly drove a user away, and now (three days later) you basically dance in his abandoned house and declare yourself to be correct?
::And your bit about what "rational people do" is hilariously wrong. Rational people will consider the costs and benefits when it comes to spending their limited free time, and then act accordingly. As such, MRellek acted perfectly rational:
::*User didn't break any rules, yet is suddenly on probation and has to submit a writing plan
::*User delivers a writing plan ("Once I get more free time I plan on working on some of the math and engineering articles or chemistry related to my field.")
::*User is banned. Forever.
::*User is gradually unbanned, no word on whether the probation is lifted, and the loose-cannon sysop barely gets a slap on the wrist.
::Things like these tend to make people feel unwelcome. CP already offers close to no benefits for the average user, so even "minor things" like getting a permanent ban for not unconditionally submitting to a specific sysop will tip the scales towards "Oh well, I tried, but whatever."
::I know you and your fellow sysops think that Conservapedia is soooooooo much better than Wikipedia and that people would do anything to be allowed to stay and contribute to this glorious project, but... uh, no. It's not. It's a safe haven for fringe opinions ("Jesus disproves General Relativity! Beauty of fall leaves disproves evolution! Declining SAT scores disprove an old Earth!") and for parodists who get their kicks out of parroting Andy while behaving like jerks to regular non-sysops.
::And how about CP's awesome reputation that makes editors want to contribute? Liberals think that CP is a ''troll site'' (literally - ask Conservative, he's the one to thank for that), conservatives just look at the "The Bible needs to be retranslated into Conservative English!" project and shake their heads, and when Dawkins mentioned Andy's little Lenski episode in his book, a Creationist site accused him of attacking a ''straw man''.
::Conservapedia was founded more than four years ago. Look at the site in its current state, look at its history, and then ask yourself whether you can afford to drive away people who did no harm just because they didn't do exactly what you expected them to do. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 20:15, 9 August 2011 (EDT)