Talk:Conservapedia: Difference between revisions

Talk:Conservapedia (edit)

Revision as of 17:32, 2 December 2008

46 bytes removed , 2 December 2008

m

→‎Sysops and blocks: Formatting

Michaeldsuarez

272

edits

@@ Line 124: / Line 124: @@
 ===Sysops and blocks===
-:::::::By and large the section accurately reflected what happens on the site.  The stated "policy" of the site is one thing, what actually happens there is another.  I intend to replace the section (having removed what I regard as a couple of references that overstep the mark).  --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 18:09, 28 November 2008 (EST)
+By and large the section accurately reflected what happens on the site.  The stated "policy" of the site is one thing, what actually happens there is another.  I intend to replace the section (having removed what I regard as a couple of references that overstep the mark).  --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 18:09, 28 November 2008 (EST)
+:It's still biased and unnecessary. It's not our job to "protect" people from overzealous sysops. Caveat emptor. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 19:53, 28 November 2008 (EST)
-::::::::It's still biased and unnecessary. It's not our job to "protect" people from overzealous sysops. Caveat emptor. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 19:53, 28 November 2008 (EST)
+::And I've reverted it right back.  I've been watching CP for over a year now, and those ''are'' their policies.  It ain't pretty.  --[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 21:16, 28 November 2008 (EST)
-::::::::And I've reverted it right back.  I've been watching CP for over a year now, and those ''are'' their policies.  It ain't pretty.  --[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 21:16, 28 November 2008 (EST)
+:::I'm glad someone's watching them, but that's not really the point of WikiIndex. It's not our job to make up people's minds for them. Sounds like that's Conservapedia's job. ;-) But seriously, it seems to me that the consensus here on this talk page had been established and it did not include your ''interpretation'' of their policies. I'd like to hear from other people, though. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 01:13, 29 November 2008 (EST)
-:::::::::I'm glad someone's watching them, but that's not really the point of WikiIndex. It's not our job to make up people's minds for them. Sounds like that's Conservapedia's job. ;-) But seriously, it seems to me that the consensus here on this talk page had been established and it did not include your ''interpretation'' of their policies. I'd like to hear from other people, though. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 01:13, 29 November 2008 (EST)
+::::I haven’t had unexpected blocks on Conservapedia.  I knew what Conservapedia is like from RationalWiki before I started editing Conservapedia.  I have had unexpected blocks on other Wikis with different usernames.   I was editing [[Wiktionary]] a bit carelessly and expected warnings before any block.  I think users should know that they can get blocked easily on Conservapedia. [[User:Proxima Centauri|Proxima Centauri]] 02:41, 29 November 2008 (EST)
-::::::::::I haven’t had unexpected blocks on Conservapedia.  I knew what Conservapedia is like from RationalWiki before I started editing Conservapedia.  I have had unexpected blocks on other Wikis with different usernames.   I was editing [[Wiktionary]] a bit carelessly and expected warnings before any block.  I think users should know that they can get blocked easily on Conservapedia. [[User:Proxima Centauri|Proxima Centauri]] 02:41, 29 November 2008 (EST)
+:::::As stated above it has certainly been my experience that the section included by [[User:Gulik|Gulik]] accurately reflects the site's policies (both stated and unstated).  However, I would prefer the version that I reinstated (which I think was more measured).
-:::::::::::As stated above it has certainly been my experience that the section included by [[User:Gulik|Gulik]] accurately reflects the site's policies (both stated and unstated).  However, I would prefer the version that I reinstated (which I think was more measured).
+::::::I don't see why the section should not be included so long as it is accurate.  Otherwise persons considering editing Conservapedia are very likely to receive a rude shock when they are blocked unexpectedly.  It is a way for WikiIndex to assist its users.  --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 21:10, 29 November 2008 (EST)
-:::::::::::I don't see why the section should not be included so long as it is accurate.  Otherwise persons considering editing Conservapedia are very likely to receive a rude shock when they are blocked unexpectedly.  It is a way for WikiIndex to assist its users.  --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 21:10, 29 November 2008 (EST)
 Most countries don't follow caveat emptor. Even the United States has consumer protection legislation.  I think we are helping potential users by warning them about Conservapedia's blocking policy.  The oponents of Conservapedia have compromised a great deal.  I think this should stay. [[User:Proxima Centauri|Proxima Centauri]] 02:20, 30 November 2008 (EST)
 :As long as it's done politely, I think it's appropriate.  The long list of abuses (One editor did this; "nonsense" seems to mean anything factual) was fairly ridiculous.  But helpful advice seems to be a good thing, and fairly "WikiWay" in that it is feedback and guidelines to help the community.  [[User:Fishal|Fishal]] 12:17, 30 November 2008 (EST)
 ::But is this really Conservapedia's blocking ''policy''? I see one person's ''opinion'' of what it is. I haven't looked at the rewrite yet, though. I still think we shouldn't be evaluating the worth of the content or the experience of the wikis we list here. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 17:53, 1 December 2008 (EST)