Difference between revisions of "Debate:Was the media attention needed?"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (corrected spelling) |
|||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
== No, but if it was not for it, I would not be here == | == No, but if it was not for it, I would not be here == | ||
| − | + | [[User:Sulgran|Sulgran]] 23:27, 20 March 2007 (EDT) | |
== Conservapedia shouldn't have had any media coverage for the sake of protecting pages == | == Conservapedia shouldn't have had any media coverage for the sake of protecting pages == | ||
Revision as of 03:27, March 21, 2007
I discovered Conservapedia from the media but it has also seems to have attracted unwanted attention. Do you think we really needed all that coverage? --Eiyuu Kou 23:03, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
It was needed to spread the gospel of Conservapedia
I'm sorry... the what? Myk 23:26, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
The attention was needed
It should have only been mentioned, not covered
No, but if it was not for it, I would not be here
Sulgran 23:27, 20 March 2007 (EDT)