Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,411
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 286:
Line 286: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Conservapedia:Community Portal (view source)
Revision as of 04:28, August 14, 2011
, 04:28, August 14, 2011→Response to Karajou
That would be true, if Conservapedia were a monolith, requiring ideological conformity. But it's not, and never has been. Let's not forget the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares,
That would be true, if Conservapedia were a monolith, requiring ideological conformity. But it's not, and never has been. Let's not forget the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares,
:'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Tares#Narrative An enemy hath done this]. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest.''' [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 23:29, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
:'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Tares#Narrative An enemy hath done this]. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest.''' [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 23:29, 13 August 2011 (EDT)
Here is the evidence that I am aware of:
1. Both RobS and TracyS edited from the same IP address.
2. Both were somewhat obsessed with my talk page design in an annoying way despite the fact that Conservapedia says a user's talk page is his/her castle.
3. Both were dishonest. For example, RobS claiming his indicated that he referred to me as demonic at Conservapedia which he never did as he knows the charge was baseless plus he didn't have the guts to do this at Conservapedia. TracyS claimed he/she was not trying to annoy me about my talk despite using language purposely meant to annoy.
4. Both were annoying and needlessly argumentative.
5. Karajou claims there were multiple sockpuppets of RobS, but I have not personally investigated this matter.
RobS is still an egotist and has learned nothing. It would be a big mistake at this time to give him back his Sysop/Admin rights. He would just foment a lot of useless drama and nonsense. Conservapedia doesn't need RobS the egotist to change its structure and a panel of which he is not a part to refine its blocking policy is far better suited to the task.
I did block RobS earlier for a short spell due to him being disruptive to me posting a notice in this room that would be more constructive than much of the current content. However, with another Sysops's assistance I was able to send out invitations to the appropriate parties so the notice at the community portal was no longer needed so I unblocked RobS. Given his past behavior, I see no reason to apologize for any inconvenience this caused him.
I will know let RobS give his empty sales pitch on how his desysoping was all a misunderstanding and a mistake on Aschlafly's part. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:28, 14 August 2011 (EDT)