| Line 90: |
Line 90: |
| | Furthermore, has the User: Conservative account edited the [[Sun Tzu]] article? If so, then at least one editor with User: Conservativedom understands the strategy/tactic of stealth and keeping the opposition guessing (User: Conservativedom does not agree with all of Sun Tzu's actions/writings by the way). And we know that the left/liberals such as Alinsky use the tactic of attacking individuals before attacking institutions/groups (Rule #12 of [http://www.bestofbeck.com/wp/activism/saul-alinskys-12-rules-for-radicals Alinsky's rules for radicals]). But, User: Conservative is more than one editor! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:04, 31 December 2014 (EST) | | Furthermore, has the User: Conservative account edited the [[Sun Tzu]] article? If so, then at least one editor with User: Conservativedom understands the strategy/tactic of stealth and keeping the opposition guessing (User: Conservativedom does not agree with all of Sun Tzu's actions/writings by the way). And we know that the left/liberals such as Alinsky use the tactic of attacking individuals before attacking institutions/groups (Rule #12 of [http://www.bestofbeck.com/wp/activism/saul-alinskys-12-rules-for-radicals Alinsky's rules for radicals]). But, User: Conservative is more than one editor! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:04, 31 December 2014 (EST) |
| | :By the way, German evolutionists did not think that American creationists would land on the beaches of Normandy. But that is exactly what happened!!! (And [[Dwight D. Eisenhower|Dwight D. Eisenhower]] appears to have been a creationist [http://www.icr.org/article/presidential-support-for-creationism/]). | | :By the way, German evolutionists did not think that American creationists would land on the beaches of Normandy. But that is exactly what happened!!! (And [[Dwight D. Eisenhower|Dwight D. Eisenhower]] appears to have been a creationist [http://www.icr.org/article/presidential-support-for-creationism/]). |
| | + | |
| | + | ::''"We can guarantee you that User: Karajou will not claim that User: Conservative is merely one editor. Why? Because User: Karajou was informed that more than one person has edited using the User: Conservative account."'' |
| | + | ::When did this happen? In the first months of your membership? I doubt it, as it seems unlikely that Andy would bestow such extensive rights as "checkuser" and "administrator" on a communal account. |
| | + | ::Even when I started editing in 2011, you hadn't come out as a multitude, that happened during the last one or two years. So, assuming that there is more than one user at your account, he/she/them were invited to do so somewhat after 2011. Am I right? |
| | + | ::This is quite troubling: your weren't even able to lobby for upload-rights for [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt]] until now, but you gave some person access to "checkuser", "administrator" and "oversight" rights! Either this person never had an account here at Conservapedia, or it had an account before, but wasn't seen worthy to get these rights which you decided to share. |
| | + | ::I would call this ''nepotism'', and it is impossible to square it with Conservapedia's claim of being a ''meritocracy'': |
| | + | ::::'''''Conservapedia is a meritocracy. Administrators are selected as needed from the best of the best contributors, there is no popularity contest to determine promotion, and nominations not accepted. By your own work shall you be known. ''''' |
| | + | ::But that is just a [[Conservapedia:Guidelines|guideline]] - and you are not so awfully keen of them, like: |
| | + | ::::'''''Conservapedia does not allow "sockpuppet" accounts or unaccountable anonymous proxy use. ''''' |
| | + | ::''In addition, we know you were successfully rebuffed about the "historybuff" matter and that you most certainly do not have the moral high ground. You did not prove the identity/identities of the mysterious historybuff. And you acknowledged (after you shown to be acting in an unbecoming manner) that no Conservapedia rule was broken if a person using the historybuff account was an Conservapedia admin (Of course, the same would apply if persons using the account were admins) so you failed again! '' |
| | + | ::You were [[User:Historybuff]]. The little incident of your intermingled comments at the main talk page made this obvious. [[User:Karajou]] could prove it. Thereby '''you broke a rule (or do you claim that it is just a ''guideline'' and doesn't apply to you?)''' |
| | + | ::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 03:39, 2 January 2015 (EST) |
| | | | |
| | == Happy New Year == | | == Happy New Year == |
| | | | |
| | The editors of the User: Conservative account wish you a happy new year. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:06, 2 January 2015 (EST) | | The editors of the User: Conservative account wish you a happy new year. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:06, 2 January 2015 (EST) |