Changes

::::No doubt you understand the system better than I do, but I assumed that the sysops were accountable upwards, to ASchlafly. Isn't that the point - to avoid mob rule by having a clear chain of command with a definite leader at the top? [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 18:24, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

::::No doubt you understand the system better than I do, but I assumed that the sysops were accountable upwards, to ASchlafly. Isn't that the point - to avoid mob rule by having a clear chain of command with a definite leader at the top? [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 18:24, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

::(EC) P.s. Note that I'm not a sysop or an admin, just a user. I haven't taken any part in this debate, nor do I belong to any side or have any personal allegiance to anyone involved. My only interest is to prevent further excesses; one inflammatory comment leads to more and so on, leading to a very poor quality of debate. This hurts everyone who wants open discussion. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 17:44, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

::(EC) P.s. Note that I'm not a sysop or an admin, just a user. I haven't taken any part in this debate, nor do I belong to any side or have any personal allegiance to anyone involved. My only interest is to prevent further excesses; one inflammatory comment leads to more and so on, leading to a very poor quality of debate. This hurts everyone who wants open discussion. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 17:44, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

::It is structured that way, that's true. However, sysops likewise are to be held to the same standard, ''if not moreso'', of editing practices non -sysop should be. They are the example. If a Conservapedia Sysop is abusive and incivil -- to anyone, sysop or non-sysop -- he/she needs to be called on it. Sysopship is not a brotherhood of mindless robots, they are not the site owners "goons and thugs" tasked with being "hitmen" to obliterate Conservapdia's critics. Their job primarily is to ''help'' editors learn how to become better editors and contributors. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 23:02, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

:::Jcw, It is structured that way, that's true. However, sysops likewise are to be held to the same standard, ''if not moreso'', of editing practices non -sysop should be. They are the example. If a Conservapedia Sysop is abusive and incivil -- to anyone, sysop or non-sysop -- he/she needs to be called on it. Sysopship is not a brotherhood of mindless robots, they are not the site owners "goons and thugs" tasked with being "hitmen" to obliterate Conservapdia's critics. Their job primarily is to ''help'' editors learn how to become better editors and contributors. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 23:02, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

:::Unless the language is completely offensive it should stay. Jcw, you are removing peoples reasoning, which IS NOT a personal remark. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:41, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

:::Unless the language is completely offensive it should stay. Jcw, you are removing peoples reasoning, which IS NOT a personal remark. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:41, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

::::On that we disagree; perhaps an admin will settle the point. In my opinion, an argument like this should be handled very carefully and with the highest levels of civility and respect for all parties. The comments I removed evinced disrespect variously for Conservative, ASchlafly and the site as a whole. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 17:44, 1 August 2011 (EDT)

::::On that we disagree; perhaps an admin will settle the point. In my opinion, an argument like this should be handled very carefully and with the highest levels of civility and respect for all parties. The comments I removed evinced disrespect variously for Conservative, ASchlafly and the site as a whole. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 17:44, 1 August 2011 (EDT)