SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
3,266
edits
Changes
Conservapedia:Community Portal (view source)
Revision as of 05:26, May 12, 2016
, 05:26, May 12, 2016→What's going on with user "SoridAtom"?: new section
#It is ineffective. We often have vandal attacks, in which someone vandalizes as many pages as possible before they get stopped. The locking is obviously a response to these attacks. But people engaging in mass vandalism will just go on to another page when they see one that is locked. The total number of pages that they vandalize before they are stopped is still the same. The amount of work that sysops (or, in a few cases, I) must do to clean up the mess is the same.
#It is ineffective. We often have vandal attacks, in which someone vandalizes as many pages as possible before they get stopped. The locking is obviously a response to these attacks. But people engaging in mass vandalism will just go on to another page when they see one that is locked. The total number of pages that they vandalize before they are stopped is still the same. The amount of work that sysops (or, in a few cases, I) must do to clean up the mess is the same.
[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 19:00, 1 May 2016 (EDT)
[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 19:00, 1 May 2016 (EDT)
== What's going on with user "SoridAtom"? ==
Can someone explain why SoridAtom's writings were treated the way they were? He wrote an article [[Atheism is the default position]] that, within the space of 36 minutes, Cons deleted, restored, deleted again, restored again, moved to an essay with a redirect, deleted the redirect, and deleted the essay, as well as blocking him.
I looked at it, and found nothing outside of Conservapedia's stance on these issues. It seemed to lie fully within what is commonly accepted. I made some notes to myself for future criticism (gently, not fire and brimstone) about the fact that it had two astonishingly bad run-on sentences. One of them had three main clauses and one subordinate clause, without a single comma anywhere. It went on for 3-1/2 lines on my screen.
I would not have bothered with this if I had thought it was going to be considered trolling or vandalism, or if I had thought that he would be blocked for "liberal trolling" or some similar block reason.
Could someone please restore this, so that we can see what it was about? [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 01:26, 12 May 2016 (EDT)