Talk:RationalWiki (en)/Archive2: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
As for RationalWiki, despite what it is said on the main page of that site regarding their own intelligence, is nothing more than a joke. [[User:70.156.10.208|70.156.10.208]] 07:37, 26 October 2007 (EDT) | As for RationalWiki, despite what it is said on the main page of that site regarding their own intelligence, is nothing more than a joke. [[User:70.156.10.208|70.156.10.208]] 07:37, 26 October 2007 (EDT) | ||
:Someone is jealous. [[User:24.141.169.227|24.141.169.227]] 16:20, 20 November 2007 (EST) | :Someone is jealous. [[User:24.141.169.227|24.141.169.227]] 16:20, 20 November 2007 (EST) | ||
:Okay, taking these in orde: | |||
:*"Picking fights" means "trying to insist on historical fact, not the fevered delusions of beady-eyed fanatics. See the Great "Dawkins is a Professor" Debate. | |||
:*"Liberal Perspective" = "Not as rabidly Liberal-Hating as Andy Schlafly." | |||
:*Outright contempt....well, ya got me there. Conservapedia is downright Stalinist in its adherence to the One True Opinion About Everything, and I have massive contempt for that kind of attitude. | |||
:*"Objectionable content" = Anything Liberal, or that treats S-x as anything less that a Cthulhuesque horror that a wrathful God inflicted upon humanity to PUNISH them. And I don't recall seeing any porn links--got versions to back up that wild accusation? | |||
:**Also, remember that RWers aren't the ONLY people editing CP for the laughs. | |||
:*Anyone who says flat-out that they're a Liberal on CP gets banned. Usually immediately. So lying (especially about that we think of Andy) is the only way to get anything done. | |||
:*Vandalism is generally destructive acts not fixable with a single mouse-click, so, no. | |||
:**And adding actual, provable facts that happen not to agree with the Schlafly Worldview is only 'vandalism' from within said constricted worldview, but whatever. | |||
:**Cyberterrorism? Is that where we [http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=DNO6G4ApJQY blow up trucks over the Internet]? | |||
:It's a joke you can believe in, though. Fnord. | |||
:Yes, lil' Debbie got me to register here. Who says nothing good comes of Conservapedia? --[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 16:55, 1 August 2008 (EDT) |
Revision as of 20:55, 1 August 2008
What the writers of this article page tell you is the fact that they were tossed out of Conservapedia for the following:
- Fighting and picking fights;
- Trying to force a liberal perspective in various articles;
- Showing outright contempt for the site, conservatism in general, Christianity, and family values;
- The insertion of objectionable content, such as porn images and links to porn sites;
- Lying, by either including deliberately false article content, or lying in their own conduct;
- Vandalism and cyber-terrorist tactics.
As for RationalWiki, despite what it is said on the main page of that site regarding their own intelligence, is nothing more than a joke. 70.156.10.208 07:37, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
- Someone is jealous. 24.141.169.227 16:20, 20 November 2007 (EST)
- Okay, taking these in orde:
- "Picking fights" means "trying to insist on historical fact, not the fevered delusions of beady-eyed fanatics. See the Great "Dawkins is a Professor" Debate.
- "Liberal Perspective" = "Not as rabidly Liberal-Hating as Andy Schlafly."
- Outright contempt....well, ya got me there. Conservapedia is downright Stalinist in its adherence to the One True Opinion About Everything, and I have massive contempt for that kind of attitude.
- "Objectionable content" = Anything Liberal, or that treats S-x as anything less that a Cthulhuesque horror that a wrathful God inflicted upon humanity to PUNISH them. And I don't recall seeing any porn links--got versions to back up that wild accusation?
- Also, remember that RWers aren't the ONLY people editing CP for the laughs.
- Anyone who says flat-out that they're a Liberal on CP gets banned. Usually immediately. So lying (especially about that we think of Andy) is the only way to get anything done.
- Vandalism is generally destructive acts not fixable with a single mouse-click, so, no.
- And adding actual, provable facts that happen not to agree with the Schlafly Worldview is only 'vandalism' from within said constricted worldview, but whatever.
- Cyberterrorism? Is that where we blow up trucks over the Internet?
- It's a joke you can believe in, though. Fnord.
- Yes, lil' Debbie got me to register here. Who says nothing good comes of Conservapedia? --Gulik 16:55, 1 August 2008 (EDT)