Difference between revisions of "User talk:Rockford the Roe"
Conservative (Talk | contribs) (→The uncivilized wiki) |
(→The uncivilized wiki: don’t feed the troll) |
||
| Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
Gentlemen, you had madmen on the jury! Sad!]] | Gentlemen, you had madmen on the jury! Sad!]] | ||
{{Clear}} | {{Clear}} | ||
| + | *Stop feeding the troll Conservative. [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] ([[User talk:DMorris|talk]]) 00:04, 19 March 2021 (EDT) | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
<References/> | <References/> | ||
Revision as of 04:04, March 19, 2021
Ken, I'm a Catholic. Rockford the Roe (talk) 20:17, 17 March 2021 (EDT)
- Hey Ken, why did you feel like you needed to edit my talkpage to let me know about you being a Protestant? I know I'm technically "invading" your wiki, but I made this account to prove a point and to maybe share some info to Andrew's homeschool (If they still use this) of some more techy stuff they'd have a hard time finding. Rockford the Roe (talk) 20:41, 17 March 2021 (EDT)
- Why do you feel the need to inform a person you believe is called Ken that your a Catholic? By the way, more than one editor uses the User: Conservative account.Conservative (talk) 20:49, 17 March 2021 (EDT)
- The initial creation of this talkpage implies that I'm an atheist. Rockford the Roe (talk) 20:58, 17 March 2021 (EDT)
- And another thing, I'm not buying that multiple people run that account because its writing style is very consistent. Rockford the Roe (talk) 21:16, 17 March 2021 (EDT)
Check the writing style and footnoting style of the article Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals compared to other articles posted by the User: Conservative account. You might not be "buying it", neverthless while you are entitled to your opinion, you are not entitled to your own facts. For example, the footnoting style of Atheism and the persecution of homosexuals created by the User: Conservative account is very different from the other articles created using the User: Conservative account. In addition, the IQs of both editors of the User: Conservative account are above average so they may share similar characteristics in terms of vocabularies, complexity of sentence structures, etc. I rest my case in this matter knowing that I am quite victorious!Conservative (talk) 21:27, 17 March 2021 (EDT)
By the way, you may be an atheist. I cite at RW: "nuzzles on kenny's keyboard UwU daddy, i wove the way youw destwoy atheism in the twente fiwst centuwee". - Rockford the Roe, 15:53, 17 March 2021 (UTC)"Conservative (talk) 21:30, 17 March 2021 (EDT)
P.S. I suggest reading these two essays: Essay: Atheist gentlemen, what we have here is a failure to communicate and Essay: Will atheism ever disappear?. I hope this clarifies things for you.Conservative (talk) 21:55, 17 March 2021 (EDT)
The uncivilized wiki
In short, RationalWiki broke its own rules when they permabaned me. According to RationalWiki rules, a permaban requires a 66% majority. RationalWiki permabanned me without such a majority.
Of course, this proves once again that atheism/agnosticism provide no foundation in terms of having a civilized society and that atheists/agnostics are often hypocrites (see: Atheism and its anti-civilizational effects and Atheism and culture and Atheism and human rights and Atheism and human rights violations).
And much to the chagrin of RationalWikians who wished to "permaban" me, I can edit RationalWiki whenever I want through creating new accounts.
And gentlemen, always remember that in your Chicken Coop kangaroo court, I was not judged by a jury of my peers.
One of the administrators of your website who voted in your so-called "trial", namely Oxyaena, admits he is "probably raging too much most of the time to form coherent sentences".
On May 24,2020, which is the day he voted on whether a fellow editor (namely me) should be permabanned from the website, the RationalWiki editor who goes by the moniker Amassivegay wrote: "I am never sure I am even coherent most of the time."
Gentlemen, you had madmen on the jury! Sad!
