User talk:184.66.64.181

Undoing my edit on this page http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Patriarchy&action=history, you claimed you "don't have to be neutral". Why is that so? This site is supposed to be "rational". Being non-neutral isn't rational. I request you to revert to my edit. Thank you.


 * While I do think the wording could be a bit different as well, being non-neutral isn't necessarily irrational (see also: "Teach the controversy", Balance fallacy). Trust me, you're far from the first person to bring up the "I thought this was RationalWiki" argument.
 * For what it's worth, thank you for expressing a complaint like this, asking for an explanation rather than getting into a counterproductive edit war (which a lot of other relative newcomers with differing views tend to do). You may be able to elicit a larger response if you comment on the talk page of the page in question, but be prepared for snark. ℕoir LeSable (talk) 14:50, 22 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I reverted your edit because this wiki does not present a neutral point of view and was never intended to. See RationalWiki:What is a RationalWiki article? A lot of people make the mistake of thinking that all wikis=Wikipedia=neutral. I'd advise you to come up with a better justification than "It's not neutral" for removing any content from pages in future. Spud (talk) 15:19, 22 January 2016 (UTC)