Difference between revisions of "Liberal vandalism"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Undo revision 1008097 by Friday13 (talk) Lame vandalism)
Line 19: Line 19:
  
 
==Pattern of liberal vandalism on wikis==
 
==Pattern of liberal vandalism on wikis==
−
A typical liberal reads an article that contains something they don't agree with, or is about a subject they disagree with. The liberal then decides to remove all content from the page or jokingly inserts parody/nonsense. Liberals understand that their edits will be removed to the original state and they will be blocked from further editing. This pattern repeats itself over and over like a compulsive disorder.
+
Online Wikis such as [[Conservapedia]] often publish articles which contradict a typical liberal's opinions, which could lead to liberal vandalism. Liberal vandalism on wikis can manifest in multiple ways; a liberal might insert parodic or nonsensical content into an article, or they might simply delete content from the article, partially or entirely. Despite understanding that their edits would be reverted and their user accounts would be blocked, liberal vandals continue to vandalize online wikis.
 +
 
 +
[[Conservapedia]] is freqently vandalized by liberals for challenging their worldview, leading them to insert explicit or misleading content into articles. The vandalism inserted into Conservapedia can mislead readers who don't understand the nature of Wikis into believing that the encyclopedia is "just wacko," despite that not being the case, according to Brian Macdonald, a Conservapedia user who reverts vandalism.<ref>http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jun/19/nation/na-schlafly19/2</ref>
  
 
==See Also==
 
==See Also==

Revision as of 00:22, January 3, 2016

Liberal vandalism is the destructive, anarchist behavior of targeting anything conservative as a means to further the liberal cause. Liberals like to talk about tolerance but their actions can be intolerant of opposing positions. The offenses of liberal vandals entail everything from malicious intent to libel of a conservative or can go as far as breaking the law.

Examples of Liberal Vandalism

  • defacing or destroying property of GOP election offices [1]
  • break-in a GOP campaign office and steal laptop with strategic election information [2]
  • entering private property to destroy GOP campaign signs [3]
  • hacking into personal GOP email account then posting contents to a public Web site [4]
  • releasing sealed court documents regarding a GOP candidate's divorce [5]
  • slashing tires on vehicles used to transport voters [6]
  • spray painting cars which had GOP stickers. [7]
  • Google-bombing [8]
  • steal press run of conservative newspapers [9]
  • attacking conservative websites
  • campaign stickers plastered around a town with no intention of ever removing
  • vandals wrote graffiti on the garage of a GOP Senator running for re-election with the words "You are a criminal resign or else" and "Scum." [10]
  • defacing wikis like Conservapedia[11] and Wikipedia[12]
  • attacking their own buildings (like DNC) to frame conservatives or GOP
  • writing graffiti others' property (like in restrooms and on vending machines, for example) attacking conservatives or praising liberals

Pattern of liberal vandalism on wikis

Online Wikis such as Conservapedia often publish articles which contradict a typical liberal's opinions, which could lead to liberal vandalism. Liberal vandalism on wikis can manifest in multiple ways; a liberal might insert parodic or nonsensical content into an article, or they might simply delete content from the article, partially or entirely. Despite understanding that their edits would be reverted and their user accounts would be blocked, liberal vandals continue to vandalize online wikis.

Conservapedia is freqently vandalized by liberals for challenging their worldview, leading them to insert explicit or misleading content into articles. The vandalism inserted into Conservapedia can mislead readers who don't understand the nature of Wikis into believing that the encyclopedia is "just wacko," despite that not being the case, according to Brian Macdonald, a Conservapedia user who reverts vandalism.[13]

See Also

References