User:NightFlare/Memory Hole/Talk Public awa...

(Not memory-holed... yet...)

Conservapedia talk:Public Awareness of the Atheism Article From Conservapedia Jump to: navigation, search Why? Why such antipathy? LChriosa 08:39, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

As the atheist Farrell Till once said, he who asserts must prove. LChriosa, you never did demonstrate your above implied assertion. :) For all you know, I could be an atheist merely playing "devil's advocate". Conservative 11:36, 16 May 2008 (EDT) Well..... that would certainly be very interesting, Conservative. I won't get into this again though... Feebasfactor 15:15, 18 May 2008 (EDT) [edit] From "Blog Contest" to "Please linkspam my article"? I can't help but frown at this recent development. First of all, this started as a contest for raising blog awareness, but now it suddenly was reduced to "Tell everybody to check out my article!". Secondly, you're openly encouraging linkspam here. And such actions can reflect very badly onto this site.

Also, why is there a dedicated campaign going to raise awareness of this one article? Shouldn't we work on polishing all of Conservapedia and then encourage people to visit the site? This campaign looks highly selfish to me. And even if I get shouted down or mocked for having said this, I'm very sure that I'm not the only one who noticed the pattern behind Conservative promoting the Atheism article to "Article of the Month", Conservative promoting the Atheism article to "Article of the Year", Conservative bragging about Google ranks of the Atheism article on the mainpage, Conservative making announcements about the Atheism article being linked by some site, and now Conservative creating a dedicated page just to encourage people to spread the word... about the Atheism article. --JBrown 14:26, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

One google Homosexuality and you'll see Conservapedia's article on Homosexuality is #2, the goal is to get popular things which will likely be googled a higher rank so that we can gain more users and concentrate on more general items -- Deborah (contributions) (talk) 14:32, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

In other words, we should game the search engines by manufacturing artificial interest in the Atheism article? And you failed to answer my question: Why isn't Conservative working on making people aware of Conservapedia in general instead of just selfishly pushing his own article in every way possible? That would be strategically smarter, too: The articles in question (the Atheism article mentioned in this page and the Homosexuality one you mentioned) are both protected, so people who are lured here through them will never be able to edit them. And using the talk pages is sluggish (I had posted a simple request on the Atheism talk page, and it took almost a full week to come through). That goes against the principle of a wiki. In addition, these people would effectively be asked to contribute in any article except the ones they are interested in. And I don't know about you, but if I'm interested in the Atheism article, I would want to edit the Atheism article and not the one about Simone Inzaghi. --JBrown 15:01, 18 May 2008 (EDT) I think the idea - in this particular case - is not so much to advertise Conservapedia as a wiki and attract new editors, but rather to promote Conservapedia as an substantial internet ressource where others are often lacking (in this case, anti-atheism articles). Feebasfactor 15:15, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Correct me if I'm not on the right track there... Feebasfactor 15:16, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

The United States's largest public policy women's organization, Concerned Women of America, has an excellent article on Conservapedia in which it prominently mentions Conservapedia's atheism article.[1] Mark Davidson appears stuck for words as he fails to respond to Austin Clines latest post. JBrown, we have just reached the tip of the iceberg in terms of letting Christian conservatives know about the conservapedia atheism article. Wait until a wide variety of various grassroots conservative groups are informed regarding the conservapedia atheism article. You may dislike these groups being made aware of the conservapedia atheism article yet that certainly will not dissuade people from informing them. Conservative 16:20, 24 May 2008 (EDT) [edit] Austin Cline I notice that there is a reference to the fact that Austin Cline at About.com has been challenged in relation to the Conservapedia atheism article and that he has been unable to meet the challenge. Could you please post a link so that I (and others) can read the challenge and response? (I looked but I couldn't find it - my fault I am sure). --HHCrippen 22:04, 22 May 2008 (EDT)

Here and here. Someone named "Mark Davidson" has been good enough to take up the torch for Conservative. (I'm sure it's not him, since that's not his real name, and that would be Deceit.) Click on "Comments" to see what he's written. --Gulik 17:47, 23 May 2008 (EDT) Here is an excerpt from Austin Cline that shows a rather defeatist response in regards to Conservapedia's atheism article: Austine Cline: "Even if we were to assume that Conservapedia is worth taking seriously, and even if we were to assume that it's page on atheism happened to summarize the best and most serious explanation of and engagement with atheism, my not tackling it directly would say nothing at all about either atheism generally or even my own atheism in particular." Of course, the truth is that Austin Cline can't refute the atheism article at Conservapedia. In short, you cannot give what you do not have. Mr. Cline claimed that atheism material at Conservapedia was riddled with errors yet he could not show one error in the Conservapedia's main atheism article! When Austin Cline stops nibbling at the trouser bottoms of Conservapedia's atheism material, and decides to be man enough to tackle Conservapedia's atheism article then he might be taken seriously, but not until then. And the sad truth is that Austin Cline cannot effectively tackle Conservapedia's atheism article at his website or he will make a bigger fool of himself than he has already. Right now, at least in my estimation, Austin Cline appears to be acting rather Michael Martinesque at this point. Conservative 17:59, 23 May 2008 (EDT) Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the assumption that someone is not arguing with you because they know they can't win a logical fallacy? Also, you failed to link to the atheism article twice within your comment here - I assume you will be correcting this? Wandering 21:40, 23 May 2008 (EDT) Wandering, I assume you are trying to be Austin Cline's bulldog? If so, I believe you are severely lacking in this regard. Given the impotence of atheism, however, your impotent post was certainly to be expected. Conservative 22:06, 23 May 2008 (EDT) You missed linking to the article again. Would you like me to correct that for you? Wandering 22:10, 23 May 2008 (EDT) Hello? Wandering 19:25, 24 May 2008 (EDT) A picture of Mark Davidson confronted by Austin Cline whilst trying to argue in support of Conservapedia's atheism article. Thanks for those links Gulik. I read them. It seemed to me that Mark Davidson wasn't doing too well. I suggest that Conservative himself go over there and show this Cline fellow a thing or two. After all, it was Conservative who wrote the Atheism article. Surely he would be in the best position to argue the points contained therein. --HHCrippen 23:40, 23 May 2008 (EDT) Hawly Harvey Crippen, excuse me if I do not take you seriously. For those who are not aware Hawly Harvey Crippen was a remorseless murderer in history and I have been further told that user HHCrippen's IP address has been tied to more than one past troll on Conservapedia. I stand by my former comments regarding Austin Cline's ineptness and cowardice. The cloud of cowardice and ineptness remains over the web address About.com:Agnosticism/atheism Conservative 19:21, 24 May 2008 (EDT) Do you deny that you are the guy "Mark Davidson" on that site, Conservative? It would seem deceitful to deny that, or to delete this and try to deceive people even further. (This comment has been deleted out of deceit 2 times so far!)--GilbertS 14:17, 25 May 2008 (EDT)

Austin Cline's website About.com:Agnosticism/Atheism Retrieved from "http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia_talk:Public_Awareness_of_the_Atheism_Article" Views Project page talk page Edit + History Personal tools Log in / create account Popular Links Main Page Educational Index Debate Topics Recent changes All pages All images All logs Random page Help Help Index Statistics Conservapedia Commandments Supreme Court Course Info and Enrollment Supreme Court Project Lectures Search edit console What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Printable version Permanent link

This page was last modified 05:39, 26 May 2008. This page has been accessed 103 times. Privacy policy About Conservapedia Disclaimers