User talk:HelpJazz

Useful links How to edit a wiki CP Commandments CP Guidelines Style Manual Editing Etiquette How to create and maintain high-quality articles Report Problems List of Templates Guidelines for my talk page Please, no "ping-pong" conversations: if I leave a message on your talk page, please respond there; I'm watching it. If you start a conversation here, I'll reply here, so please watch this page Sign your posts with four tildes, like this: ~~~~ At the beginning of each month I will archive all conversations which are at least 1 month and 1 day from the most recent reply. Please, only one picture of Putin at a time. He scares me in large doses. If you have been blocked by me: please do not create a sock and complain on this page! Instead, email me and we can work it out. (You will need a valid, verified e-mail address for this to work).

Archives: >> Sep '07 >> Oct '07 >> Nov '07 >> Dec '07 >>Jan '08

Superb Blocks and Unblocks

Superb blocks and unblocks last night!!! Very well done!--Aschlafly 10:08, 22 February 2008 (EST)

Thanks. It's a pity people like that feel the need to do what they do. HelpJazz 10:27, 22 February 2008 (EST)

Bolding terms

HelpJazz, feel free to ask others, but I think the bolding of the key word in the entry is effective, as in deceit.--Aschlafly 11:16, 22 February 2008 (EST)

I thought you were only supposed to bold it the first time, but if you like bolding it every time then I won't change any others. The manual of style doesn't really indicated either way. HelpJazz 17:08, 22 February 2008 (EST)

The Manual of Style says to bold the first use. It doesn't explicitly say to not bold other uses, but that is the implication. Philip J. Rayment 21:19, 22 February 2008 (EST)

Re

Oh come on, you know libertarian does not equal liberal. DanH 22:31, 6 March 2008 (EST)

I do, very much so. It's a rather large pet peeve of mine, when people confuse the two. HelpJazz 22:32, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Warning

Sarcasm in comments to edits will result in the blocking of an account, for obvious reasons. This is a high quality site and it will remain that way. Thanks.--Aschlafly 22:58, 6 March 2008 (EST)

I'm sorry. I was a little offended when you called me a liberal (twice), intimated that I wasn't smart enough to understand what you were writing, and then suggested that my claims of misunderstanding weren't credible.

I probably should have held back the sarcasm but I've been sick lately (I slept for almost 30 straight hours Tues/Weds and had a high fever most of the time) and apparently don't have the restraint I usually do. I'll be going to bed soon; hopefully I'll be able to sleep off some more of this sickness and the grumpiness which comes with it. Good night. HelpJazz 23:34, 6 March 2008 (EST)

PS: Hopefully I'll get better by spring break; I'll have loads of free time for editing, and a lot of backed up class notes to convert to articles!

I don't mean to be nosy

Do you mind if I ask what school you go to? I know someone taking chemical engineering at Drexel, and it just sparked my interest when I saw you had the same major.--Steve 20:18, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

I go to Bucknell University. The logo's also on my user page :) HelpJazz 09:36, 12 March 2008 (EDT)

I can never get my head around it

Why do people like you contribute here? I mean, people like you are honest, hardworking reliable persons who genuinely want to help out. But this place is little more than a hate site aimed at Liberals and Gays. Their Liberals and Homosexuality articles are the laughing stock of the Blogosphere. I'm a Moderately Conservative Blogger (I back mc Cain) and these ultra's make the rest of us look bad. Decent people like yourself are only an accessory to the broader betrayal of conservative principles, which these guys seem to parody every day with articles like Liberals and friendship or Gay Bowel Syndrome or Gay Bomb. Its absolutely amazing. McCain08 13:29, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

I'm not really sure how to take that. HelpJazz 15:59, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Maybe he doesn't fixate on only a few articles and views the project as a whole. HelpJazz has been an invaluable contributor and doesn't feel he has to but heads on every small point he may not agree with. We can all find things we may not like, but there is always a great deal of improvement that can be made in other areas. To reduce our site to a few offending articles and ignore the rest is petty and is hardly something that a conservative blogger would do. Learn together 17:25, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

I do know how to take that! Thanks Learn together :) HelpJazz 18:53, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

Hi Learn Together,

I'm just interested to know what you would consider to be an alternative article I could assess as being trustworthy and encyclopedic? I've hit random page 10 times and I've got, Dirge, Decency, Statute of Anne, Lemon test, African Americans, Jonah, Easter, Canadian deuterium uranium reactor, Ocarina, Brisbane. Most of them articles are very short, with only the African Americans article standing out but even that is puny by Wikipedia standards. This place, as you like to believe is not interested in developing these run of the mill, largely unpolitical articles. It is obsessed by using Liberals as a catchphrase at every turn. Your right, the majority of articles here are apolitical. But the issue is not how many slander and deface homosexuals and Liberals, but the mere presence of a derogatory and (what seems to me) parody article demeans the entire site and its mind baffling how even minded people could even consider using the site. Wearethefuture 10:22, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

McCain08's thesis boils down to the crazy idea that by opposing evil, we are betraying goodness. That hearkens back to the heresy that when Jesus said, "Judge not," he meant that Christians should never evaluate any doctrine or deed to whether it is good or bad. Actually, what he meant is to avoid hypocrisy, which is "judging" without applying the standard of judgment to one's own self. This is the error that led to the downfall of TV preacher Jimmy Swaggart and NY governor Eliot Spitzer.

In fact, it is liberals rather than conservatives who are guilty of this error. They constantly use double standard judgments, notably giving communists and dictators a pass - literally letting them get away with murder - while magnifying some relatively minor American crimes.

McCain08's comments appear hypocritical or simply pro-liberal when he accuses us of "slandering and defacing" homosexuals. Actually our Homosexuality article is factual and well deserves its top ten status in the blogosphere. It is rather the liberal media who slander Christians and Jews for standing up to the gay rights movement. It is rather liberal politicians who have made preaching the righteousness of the Bible a crime in some countries, and liberal administrations who have banned such preaching at many American universities.

Goodness must be trustworthy. To merit the world's trust, good people must expose evil - not only in others, of course (see hypocrisy), but all around. Confession is good for the soul! --Ed Poor ^Talk 10:34, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Standing up to the gay rights movement? What are you standing up for? Really, put down Ann Coulter for a second and think for yourself.

Christ asks us not to look at the speck in our brothers eye when we haven't taken care of the plank in our own. This entire place is preachy, hypocritical and incredibly mean. Jesus would be weeping if he saw what his so called flock have produced.

Standing up to evil? Liberals are therefore evil? Homosexuals are therefore evil? And Liberals giving dictatorships a free pass... I'm sorry, where are you getting this nonsense? What is it that Bush said while campaigning in 2000 - 'I don't like going into another country and telling them how to do things our way' This was of course a response to the interventionist Gore, who advocated going into countries swarmed by civil strife. Clinton intervened in many countries (Though not enough in Rwanda) Read a book, ignoramus. Wearethefuture 10:55, 18 March 2008 (EDT)