Difference between revisions of "User talk:Tomt"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Sysop warning: The Golden rule)
(Sysop warning: Should all users be equal here?)
Line 57: Line 57:
 
::''Sysop's and Bureaucrats are the Administrators of Conservapedia. Their instructions, as to Conservapedia policy and/or the appropriateness or inappropriateness of user actions, are to be followed. Failure to do so will result in the user being blocked.''
 
::''Sysop's and Bureaucrats are the Administrators of Conservapedia. Their instructions, as to Conservapedia policy and/or the appropriateness or inappropriateness of user actions, are to be followed. Failure to do so will result in the user being blocked.''
 
:Note: ''Their <nowiki>[</nowiki>[[Special:Listusers%26group%3Dsysop|sysops]]<nowiki>]</nowiki> instructions, as to Conservapedia policy [...] are to be followed'', which means if a sysop has decided it is so it is so. If you argue you get blocked. [[User:Auld Nick|Auld Nick]] 08:09, 19 May 2007 (EDT)
 
:Note: ''Their <nowiki>[</nowiki>[[Special:Listusers%26group%3Dsysop|sysops]]<nowiki>]</nowiki> instructions, as to Conservapedia policy [...] are to be followed'', which means if a sysop has decided it is so it is so. If you argue you get blocked. [[User:Auld Nick|Auld Nick]] 08:09, 19 May 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
*No need for sarcasm, Auld Nick. It's simply rude to label another person as "rude". In one etiquette book I read, it is considered the height of rudeness to do this.
 +
*The exception is parents teaching their children, or anyone else have authority to teach and enforce a standard.
 +
*The idea that "we are all equals here" is anarchic nonsense which even Wikipedia does not tolerate. If you disagree with this, perhaps you should start a discussion about ethics as one of our [[Debate topics]]. How about: [[Conservapedia:Should all users be equal here?]] --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 08:15, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

Revision as of 07:15, 19 May 2007

Use in research

You say: "I would not currently use many of the articles in a piece of research due to this bias."

Goodness, I hope you would not use any encyclopedia in a piece of research. Not Conservapedia, not Wikipedia, not the Encyclopædia Britannica. None of them are acceptable references. They are at best useful for acquiring background in an unknown area, but they are secondary sources at best. Dpbsmith 13:08, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

You must remember that when I am researching I am finding mostly out information on topics on my A level course, and therefore use many encyclopedias, textbooks and websites in amalgamating a piece of research. --TomT 14:21, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

Liberal?

Tomt you have been identified as a liberal by User:AustinM, would you mind self identifying? Thanks. Richard 12:00, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

Userboxes

Put

{{userboxtop|Your name}}
{{User whatever}}
{{User whatever}}
{{userboxbottom}}


For Example:
{{userboxtop|Tomt}}
{{User enAmer}}
{{User Tastycow}}
{{userboxbottom}}


will give you the set at the right

Tomt
en-US This user is a native speaker of the American English.
Cows at E3.jpg
This user thinks cows are tasty


A list of userboxes can be found at Conservapedia:userboxes.

If you need any more help just post on my talk page --CPAdmin1 19:17, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Singular forms

Many of the chemistry pages that are being created have plural forms. This makes linking difficult. Could you please avoid making plural forms of pages and edit them to singular when you come across them? --Mtur 17:45, 17 May 2007 (EDT)

Will do Mtur. Can I suggest that when you change links to the singular you use this convention [[amino acid|amino acids]]. This way the 's' has a hyper link so doesn't look strange. The word before the '|' symbol is the link and the word after is the text to be displayed, for example amino acids. --TomT 12:34, 18 May 2007 (EDT)

Sysop warning

Don't call other users rude. Read Conservapedia:Civility and Conservapedia:Avoid personal remarks.

If you don't understand an explanation, you can ask again politely or simply contribute in another area. At Conservapedia we emphasize responsibilities more than rights. Please think of a way you can help this project. --Ed Poor 07:21, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

I do not feel I deserve this warning - From what I have read, I have done nothing to contravene the guidelines you have just shown me. I was given a rude answer, I complained at this and was ignored and I feel that this is rude. --TomT 07:33, 19 May 2007 (EDT)
Please take a day or two to decide whether you want to be in this project, then. --Ed Poor 07:45, 19 May 2007 (EDT)

Note the Golden rule here Conservapedia:Locks and Blocks:

Sysop's and Bureaucrats are the Administrators of Conservapedia. Their instructions, as to Conservapedia policy and/or the appropriateness or inappropriateness of user actions, are to be followed. Failure to do so will result in the user being blocked.
Note: Their [sysops] instructions, as to Conservapedia policy [...] are to be followed, which means if a sysop has decided it is so it is so. If you argue you get blocked. Auld Nick 08:09, 19 May 2007 (EDT)
  • No need for sarcasm, Auld Nick. It's simply rude to label another person as "rude". In one etiquette book I read, it is considered the height of rudeness to do this.
  • The exception is parents teaching their children, or anyone else have authority to teach and enforce a standard.
  • The idea that "we are all equals here" is anarchic nonsense which even Wikipedia does not tolerate. If you disagree with this, perhaps you should start a discussion about ethics as one of our Debate topics. How about: Conservapedia:Should all users be equal here? --Ed Poor 08:15, 19 May 2007 (EDT)