Difference between revisions of "User talk:Pro"
From Conservapedia
(where are the rules?) |
|||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
:: You didn't identify yourself or explain your violation of the rules, and your posting of material that was already identified as unacceptable. Because it is late at night, I have no choice but to block you for the time being. That's not censorship, that is adherence to simple rules, which is indeed conservative.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 01:53, 14 February 2007 (EST) | :: You didn't identify yourself or explain your violation of the rules, and your posting of material that was already identified as unacceptable. Because it is late at night, I have no choice but to block you for the time being. That's not censorship, that is adherence to simple rules, which is indeed conservative.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 01:53, 14 February 2007 (EST) | ||
| − | :::And where are the rules? I cannot see an apparent link anywhere. If you are going to have Rule of Law, the laws better be clearly accessible. There is no reference to any rules on your editing page as far as I can tell. | + | :::And where are the rules? I cannot see an apparent link anywhere. If you are going to have Rule of Law, the laws better be clearly accessible. There is no reference to any rules on your editing page as far as I can tell.[[User:Pro|Pro]] 01:57, 14 February 2007 (EST) |
Revision as of 06:57, February 14, 2007
Your edits are hostile and in violation of the rules. After you saw an explanation of why the Wikipedia's entry for the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons was unacceptable, you attempted to post the unacceptable entry on this website.
It's late at night and I have no option but to block your account to prevent further violations. I will wait ten minutes to allow you to fully identify yourself and explain your actions. In the absence of a full identification and explanation, I will have no choice but to block your id.--Aschlafly 01:34, 14 February 2007 (EST)
- Yes, isn't censorship great? Consider this a test of how you would rule if you were the 'king'. Some conservative... Pro 01:49, 14 February 2007 (EST)
- Your changes to the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons is a slight improvement, but you may consider to cite your sources.
- You didn't identify yourself or explain your violation of the rules, and your posting of material that was already identified as unacceptable. Because it is late at night, I have no choice but to block you for the time being. That's not censorship, that is adherence to simple rules, which is indeed conservative.--Aschlafly 01:53, 14 February 2007 (EST)
- And where are the rules? I cannot see an apparent link anywhere. If you are going to have Rule of Law, the laws better be clearly accessible. There is no reference to any rules on your editing page as far as I can tell.Pro 01:57, 14 February 2007 (EST)
