Changes

I would like to return this discussion to matters of significance.  The feeling among a number of editors is that there is a lack of uniformity in enforcement of rules and that some sysops act in an arbitrary and, sometimes, capricious manner.  What is sought is, in essence, the rule of law.  A system wherein all editors know where they stand and are not subject to whim.  In my view this is a hugely important issue for this site.  In any venture these issues are important, but in a co-operative venture such as a wiki they are absolutely vital.  --[[User:JarradD|JarradD]] 19:43, 27 July 2011 (EDT)

I would like to return this discussion to matters of significance.  The feeling among a number of editors is that there is a lack of uniformity in enforcement of rules and that some sysops act in an arbitrary and, sometimes, capricious manner.  What is sought is, in essence, the rule of law.  A system wherein all editors know where they stand and are not subject to whim.  In my view this is a hugely important issue for this site.  In any venture these issues are important, but in a co-operative venture such as a wiki they are absolutely vital.  --[[User:JarradD|JarradD]] 19:43, 27 July 2011 (EDT)

: If I recall correctly, haven't people been banned from Conservapedia for being a member of an atheistic site before? If we do want consistency of rules/sysop accountability and if Rob is indeed a member of said site, then shouldn't he face a penalty? --[[User:BradleyS|BradleyS]] 20:11, 27 July 2011 (EDT)

: If I recall correctly, haven't people been banned from Conservapedia for being a member of an atheistic site before? If we do want consistency of rules/sysop accountability and if Rob is indeed a member of said site, then shouldn't he face a penalty? --[[User:BradleyS|BradleyS]] 20:11, 27 July 2011 (EDT)

:::[[Conservapedia:How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia]] states,

:::'''[[Conservapedia:How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia]]''' states,

::::*'''15. We do not ban users based on their comments elsewhere, such as on their own blog. Wikipedia will monitor users' blogs and ban them for their exercise of free speech on their own blogs'',

::::*'''15. We do not ban users based on their comments elsewhere, such as on their own blog. Wikipedia will monitor users' blogs and ban them for their exercise of free speech on their own blogs''';,

:::and has been CP site policy since 13 April 2007. [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:How_Conservapedia_Differs_from_Wikipedia&diff=prev&oldid=105805] The blocking of editors for alleged "membership in a website supporting vandalism" ''has always been illegitimate'', and if anything, an apology is due.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 16:03, 30 July 2011 (EDT)

:::and has been CP site policy since 13 April 2007. [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:How_Conservapedia_Differs_from_Wikipedia&diff=prev&oldid=105805] The blocking of editors for alleged "membership in a website supporting vandalism" ''has always been illegitimate'', and if anything, an apology is due.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 16:03, 30 July 2011 (EDT)

::How cute of you to start enforcing the most idiotic "rule" ever that was likely introduced by a troll who wanted CP to fail. But hey, sure, all for it. I'm sure Ed Poor will agree; after all, he has no account on-... oh, wait. :) --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 20:22, 27 July 2011 (EDT)

::How cute of you to start enforcing the most idiotic "rule" ever that was likely introduced by a troll who wanted CP to fail. But hey, sure, all for it. I'm sure Ed Poor will agree; after all, he has no account on-... oh, wait. :) --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 20:22, 27 July 2011 (EDT)