User talk:DMorris/Archive 1

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

typo

the charish on you page should be cherish.

United Nations

Could you provide a cite for your statement that the U.N. supports mainly socialist, liberal ideas? It's not that I'm disagreeing, but statements like that typically need citations (unless things have changed in the past 3 months). -- Jeff W. LauttamusDiscussion 19:39, 6 February 2010 (EST)

Thought it to be pretty much common sense, but I'll find a citation and add it. DMorris 19:40, 6 February 2010 (EST)
I found three references and added them. I realize we usually don't reference Wikipedia, but I thought it wouldn't hurt to throw that one in there with the other references. When even Wikipedia says they're socialist... DMorris 19:58, 6 February 2010 (EST)
Ehh, it basically is common knowledge. The Wikipedia reference actually helps the argument in this case, methinks. I found another citation that I'll add right now. I appreciate the quick response! -- Jeff W. LauttamusDiscussion 20:00, 6 February 2010 (EST)

Sissy punks

Those crybabies don't need additional attention, removed example of bias talk.--Jpatt 17:42, 22 March 2010 (EDT)

It is never appropriate to reference non-notable vandal sources, either in articles or talk pages. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 18:55, 22 March 2010 (EDT)
Okay. DMorris 19:00, 22 March 2010 (EDT)

Thanks!

Not exactly the same sock, but most certainly the sock of other user names! Thanks for noticing. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 13:43, 25 May 2010 (EDT)

Anti-matter

Pretty snide. I think Roger Schlafly rises above ED, don't you? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 15:48, 14 June 2010 (EDT)

Absolutely. I think you took that the wrong way; I was arguing that the topic couldn't possibly be considered encyclopedic if ED and Uncyclopedia is. DMorris 16:08, 14 June 2010 (EDT)
Gotcha. Thanks. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 16:10, 14 June 2010 (EDT)

Public Schools....."Much Less Impressive" ?

And your contributions to society would be? Palin directly enriched the citizens of her state by tens of thousands of dollars each, by changing the royalty structure that the oil and gas companies have to pay...that, in and of itself, ranks pretty high in the over-all accomplishments of any elected official, ever. And you should not have forgotten that she is also an evangelical Christian. What were you thinking? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 05:39, 1 October 2010 (EDT)

I don't consider Sarah Palin "much less impressive," but she did attend public school. I did read the "much less impressive" part, but didn't quite understand that the list was only to consist of "less impressive" members of society since Medal of Honor recipents were also listed. I took the much less impressive to mean that the list was much less impressive, despite that list being longer (at the time) than the list of Before 1962 graduates. DMorris 15:48, 11 October 2010 (EDT)

Please consider creating these articles

Please consider Creating a feminism and obesity article

Please consider creating a Feminism and obesity article at Conservapedia and cite this material: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/02/feminism-is-good-for-children.html

In addition, have the web page list some overweight and/or obese feminists with some pictures of some overweight feminists. You can also have the article link to Conservapedia's atheism and obesity article and then have the Atheism and obesity article link to the Feminism and obesity article.

Also, you could also cite a thin Conservative woman (with her picture also featured) criticizing feminism! :)

You could then incorporate the Feminism and obesity content into the Feminism article.

I am going to take my 90 day vacation from Conservapedia so I won't be creating this article. conservative 19:06, 5 February 2011 (EST)

Please consider creating a chub (gay culture) article

Please create a Chub (gay culture) article. You can read about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girth_and_mirth Then have that article link the Atheism and obesity article plus we can have the Atheism and obesity article link to the Chub (gay culture) article. See if you can find Chuck Norris saying something negative about homosexuality and then feature his pic on the web page. conservative 19:24, 5 February 2011 (EST)


  • I will get on these first thing tomorrow. DMorris 21:08, 5 February 2011 (EST)
Here is an article by Chuck Norris on homosexuality: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=59697 and here is another: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=81195 conservative 19:35, 5 February 2011 (EST)

Thanks!

Thanks for your edit to the worst movies list! MaxFletcher 00:08, 6 April 2011 (EDT)

You're welcome. DMorris 00:29, 6 April 2011 (EDT)

Thanks again!

Thanks for fixing up my blundered article on Ada Lovelace. If you're wondering what was going on, I couldn't get through from my home computer, so I had to use a proxy. The proxy was horribly broken, wouldn't let me get through the captcha so I couldn't do the external link, and it also kept breaking the picture link. Then it stopped even letting me see Conservapedia at all. And by then the damage was done and I couldn't undo it.  :-( Even a reboot of my machine didn't help. So I contacted Andy by email; he fixed it so I could access CP from my computer, but then the connection went down again. Another round of email; things seem to be OK now. If I were superstitious I would knock on wood, as they say. SamHB 20:36, 6 April 2011 (EDT)

What?

What were you trying to do here?--IDuan 22:17, 29 April 2011 (EDT)

There's a form at http://www.bugmenot.com/ that wanted me to make a specific URL come to life to verify my authority at Conservapedia.com to block people from posting their login credentials for CP on there, so I did that. Maybe I should have gotten Andy or somebody to do it, but I doubt they'll mind that I did it. Saw a scandal where somebody did that on another website, looked up Conservapedia.com just for giggles, and it turns out there's several vandal accounts listed there. But there won't be for long. DMorris 22:24, 29 April 2011 (EDT)
Ahh okay - I thought you might be trying to block websites, and I was just gonna say that's not the way at alllll. haha, but good luck in your user blocking!--IDuan 22:41, 29 April 2011 (EDT)
Mission accomplished DMorris 22:44, 29 April 2011 (EDT)

Pithy

Let's not drag this into the realm of ad hominem insults. If I must change my name, then I will, but I assure you, this "Whiny Little Atheist" has a stack of facts and logic to back up his claims. Short and sweet, I don't want to cause problems with anyone, but you're free to call me whatever you like. Just know that any harsh words you levy will be met with equal recourse.

You must really want to be blocked. DMorris 21:23, 1 May 2011 (EDT)

Why would I want to be blocked? As far as I can tell, I've done and said nothing contrary to the Conservapedia Commandments. Last I checked, the realm was open to opposing views (Not talk page debates, which is where this seems to be headed rather quickly). Let's not forget that you cast the first stone into the realm of personal attacks, and I had levied no complaints against any users. I only had an issue with the way atheists were unfairly represented, and with the lack of reasonable evidence to support the claims made in the thread.

But again, to be clear, I will not mince words. I do not want to cause problems, like I've already said; however, if you do choose to insult me in the future, I will not refrain from rebuttal. Let us hope we can both be civil about this and move past Religious differences. KiloByter 22:08, 1 May 2011 (EDT)

You just need to familiarize yourself with our rules here at Conservapedia, and I recommend you refrain from religious debate. We are a drama free wiki, and we don't have time to endlessly debate about religion. By the way, you can sign your posts using ~~~~. I'm not trying to attack you personally, just trying to point you in the right direction. Otherwise I would have just blocked you. DMorris 22:16, 1 May 2011 (EDT)

Essay:Resisting Socialist Landfills

Hi, I just found this essay that you wrote. I was wondering if you based it off of my Essay: Real Environmentalism, since it makes most of the same points.Thanks. AddisonDM 10:55, 13 June 2011 (EDT)

I'm just going to go with intelligent, conservative minds think alike. DMorris 16:31, 13 June 2011 (EDT)

MySpace

Good catch. I found one earlier on the Greatest Conservative Movies list on Space Jam where it said Michael Jackson rather than Michael Jordan starred. Kinda makes you wonder how much spare time these vandals have.--JamesWilson 23:32, 18 July 2011 (EDT)

Please let me know if you want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel

Please let me know if you want to serve on a blocking policy refinement panel. I invited someone to edit Conservapedia and they were blocked and they should not have been. I got the block overturned. So I think there is room for improvement in Conservapedia's blocking policy. Sysops can sign up HERE. I invited active Syops/Admins plus people with blocking rights who might wish to be Sysops. If I left anyone out, please let them know about the panel. The people with blocking rights can sign up HERE. The panel will probably convene when Iduan is back from his summer vacation or fairly soon afterwards. Conservative 13:47, 13 August 2011 (EDT)

I'm interested. DMorris 14:33, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
Ok, I will list you on the page. Iduan is on vacation. The panel can start when he gets back. Conservative
(: DMorris 14:40, 14 August 2011 (EDT)

The blocking policy refinement panel is convening on 8/17/11

The blocking policy refinement panel is beginning its proceedings on 8/17/11 here: http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Blocking_policy_refinement_panel_proceedings Conservative 02:20, 15 August 2011 (EDT)

The Conservapedia Blocking policy refinement panel proceedings have begun

The panel proceeding have begun here: Conservapedia:Blocking policy refinement panel proceedings You can start making your edits to the page should you wish to do so. Conservative 13:01, 17 August 2011 (EDT)

Block request

Could you please block someone with an inappropriate name? User:SexiiAshIafIyJK

thanks. ~ JonG ~ 17:50, 19 August 2011 (EDT)

I would have, but JPatt beat me to it . DMorris 17:54, 19 August 2011 (EDT)

Did we get them all?

Thanks for the help in reverting a vandal's edits - did we get them all? I was working from the most recent back, and you were going from earliest - did we meet in the middle? Taj 09:51, 15 October 2011 (EDT)

It looks like it; I don't see anymore edits from the user that say "Top".—The preceding unsigned comment was added by DMorris (talk)
I don't understand what you mean by "Top". I don't see anything that says that - where do I look? Thanks! Taj 15:23, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
I wish these idiots would stop this nonsense. Blanking pages is quite juvenile.--James Wilson 13:22, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
It wasn't quite blanking, this person added some gibberish. Who knows why? But there is an "undo" button that makes it really easy to just erase the last entry and make it go back to what it was before. Taj 15:25, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
It's annoying, but it also gives me something to do to pass the time: revert their juvenile nonsense and report to their ISPs. Hopefully some day I'll prove myself enough for Andy to give me checkuser; I'm perfectly okay with asking the senior admins for the logs, but it'd be easier if I had checkuser myself. But I don't ever see us being vandal free; there's always going to be eleven year olds that hear that they can change the contents of wikis and get inspired to mess around. DMorris 13:53, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
Yeah, that's true: there will always be liberal vandals trying to attack the site. I do hope you can become an Administrator eventually; you seem to be really good at what you do. I've been trying to get image uploading privileges here for a while, so good luck!--James Wilson 14:01, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
An aside: it seems those liberal vandals (likely the same guys) came by again earlier and messed up some pages with vulgar images. They nearly destroyed another conservative wiki. I think we need more adminstrators who are dedicated to stopping these guys and seeing from your work here you would be an excellent candidate. Personally, I think these liberal vandals just need to get a life. In any case, good luck on your endeavor!--James Wilson 13:16, 16 November 2011 (EST)
If Mr. Schlafly were ever to make me a senior administrator with CheckUser rights, I would see to it that every vandal that ever touched Conservapedia and continued vandalizing after being warned was reported to his/her network operator. Vandalism is always going to happen, it's the one's that obsessively do it over and over again that get annoying, and even boring. DMorris 13:20, 16 November 2011 (EST)
Yeah, that would do them some good. I assume you've seen some of the vulgar vandalism some of the last batch did. You have to be careful reverting that rubbish without Rollback, y'know. I just don't know why these characters have to repeatedly do this stuff. You would think they would have something better to do than repeated vandalism, like doing stuff with their family or friends... In any case, good luck on your endeavor!--James Wilson 13:24, 16 November 2011 (EST)
There's different reasons why vandals do what they do... A lot of the CP vandals do it to protest our political and religious beliefs, and/or because they hate us. The persistent one's that won't give up probably have mental illness. Then you have the common vandals that you see in any wiki, the middle school girls that think an article would look prettier with hearts and smiles, the one's who want to make a star out of themselves/their friends/a group that they're a part of by spamming their names or links to their websites on articles, the one's who want to just randomly attack someone or something they don't like by writing negative comments about it on here, and the one's that are just curious about how wikis work and decide to start changing things around to see what will happen, and sometimes they mess things up in the process. All except the curious ones that mess things up by accident are sad little souls who could really benefit from reading the Lord's good book or going to church. DMorris 13:47, 16 November 2011 (EST)
For example, I've been doing vandal patrol at Wikipedia the last couple of days, and I encountered a sad little girl in Indiana that felt compelled to trash about six other people and declare that she is pretty from her high school computer and a sad little kid in Texas that somehow thought it to be funny to add vulgarities to articles. Those are just the two recent ones that stick out in my mind that I bothered to file abuse reports on. Why these sad souls do such things I don't know DMorris 13:54, 16 November 2011 (EST)

Blocking policy improvement panel member - please give your feedback here

Blocking policy improvement panel member - please give your feedback HERE

Your assistance would be much appreciated. Conservative 15:08, 16 November 2011 (EST)

I am not trying to cause trouble, just trying to improve what is, on the whole, a brilliant wiki NHousen 3 November 10:59 ACDT

This doesn't say that you're trying to improve what you think is a brilliant wiki. DMorris 20:31, 2 November 2012 (EDT)

FTC

I very much doubt you reported that spam to the Federal Trade Commission as it is the wrong organisation. It would be similar to reporting a simple act of vandalism to the FBI, nothing would happen as they would direct you to local police branch. Dvergne 22:48, 12 April 2013 (EDT)

With all due respect, you don't know what the heck you're talking about. Read http://www.onguardonline.gov/articles/0038-spam. The local sheriff department in Charlotte County, Florida isn't going to do jack about a spammer located God knows where posting spam links on a website run by someone in New Jersey and hosted in (what ever place that isn't Charlotte County that Conservapedia's server is located). On the other hand, the Federal Trade Commission does indeed enforce federal anti-spam legislation, and they do indeed have a system for reporting spammers. DMorris 21:31, 13 April 2013 (EDT)

I think you two are talking at cross purposes because you are using two very different definitions of "spam". The common definition (OK, the really right definition is a pressed pork product....) is unsolicited commercial mass email. This is the "spam" that most people mean, and it is indeed the subject of prosecution by authorities at various levels of government. Within a wiki, there is another common, and very useful definition--placing an the URL of a commercial web site on a wiki page. This is commonly called "spamming a link", and leads to having one's account canceled. But it is not against the law on a wiki, unless one has gained access to that wiki through criminal means. Neither the FTC, nor the FBI, nor any other government agency is interested in enforcing the Conservapedia Commandments. SamHB 21:59, 14 April 2013 (EDT)

I disagree. Checkuser evidence seems to indicate that spammers are using botnets to send their spam. The botnet most likely consists of computers infected with viruses, in other words, the spammers are illegally using someone else's computer to do their dirty work. Such conduct is illegal. Besides that, companies such as Facebook and MySpace have sued spammers and won, for spam other than traditional email spam. I think Conservapedia could do the same. DMorris 14:51, 15 June 2013 (EDT)

Blocking

I joined this site mainly because it takes a very solid hard line against abortion and moral decline and am able to find articles that are relevant. I don't have and don't want the capacity to be able to edit the news section so have no choice but to post on the talk page and I don't really have anything to add to articles as the ones that concern me are covered rather well so I have little choice but to break the rule or not post at all. However to blame the world financial crisis on who may or may not be on a banknote is ridiculous don't you agree?

It's not ridiculous. I'm sure you would agree that there would be an affect on the economy if we started putting a picture of Adolph Hitler or some other hated tyrant on the U.S. Dollar, for example. But welcome to our wiki! DMorris 21:18, 15 January 2014 (EST)

IRC

Hello,
After some discussion (on my talk page and Andy's) it has been decided that I start an Internet Relay Chat channel for Conservapedia, since our old one has been dead since 2009. It is now registered and somewhat set up. I don't know if you use IRC or are interested in doing so, but anyone with block privileges on Conservapedia can also get block privileges on the new IRC channel. Unfortunately, IRC accounts are deleted after 30 days of being unused, so unless you plan on using the IRC at least once a month, there is probably not much point in registering. In any case, feel free to try it out--if you account gets deleted, we can always make another one later. If you are interested, please let me know!
The IRC channel is: #conservapedia @irc.accessIRC.net
Let me know if you have any questions or need anything else, also! --David B (TALK) 15:41, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

"Server allowing spam" blocks

Hi,
I'm glad to see you are doing some blocks on these IPs. I have records of some such IPs also, and would be happy to block them. However, do you know if I have the right to do so? I'm an "assistant SysOp" so I don't know if blocking those IPs falls under my jurisdiction. Thanks!--David B (TALK) 22:46, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

Generally speaking, it's a good idea to ask Andy or Karajou before doing anything like that. I am also technically an "assistant sysop" but since what I have been doing has been in response to vandalism, there hasn't been any question about it. DMorris (talk) 23:27, 8 August 2017 (EDT)
Another thing I am going to point out is that it is a good idea to check and see if a suspected open proxy is blocked on Wikipedia, unless you know for a fact (and can provide proof) that it is an open proxy. If an IP or IP range isn't blocked at Wikipedia as a proxy, run it past me before you block (you can email me rather than posting on-wiki if you wish). It's harder to identify ranges that need blocked without checkuser though. DMorris (talk) 13:29, 9 August 2017 (EDT)
Okay, that makes sense. I do know for a fact that my list is composed solely of public proxies (also, I wasn't sure if I should post that name, in case some vandals didn't know, but it probably doesn't matter). Since I don't have checkuser, I wouldn't be able to block specifically based on actions on this site. However, they would be addresses which can be used for that purpose. Since CP's official policy is "no proxies," I see no harm in that kind of blocking, but will probably get a second opinion before doing so. Thanks! --David B (TALK) 00:44, 10 August 2017 (EDT)
By the way, I ran a check and found that you have closed some of the vulnerabilities I've had my eye on. Good job! --David B (TALK) 00:46, 10 August 2017 (EDT)

Email

I sent you one. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:58, 2 September 2017 (EDT)

Sent you an email

I've sent you an email just now. Feel free to respond to it if you can. --MaddieJ (talk) 22:04, 27 May 2018 (EDT)