Conservapedia talk:Commandments

TK's "inhuman" seems to have bled over to here, resulting, of course, as we are wont, with the creation of a "subhuman" user. If only he were funnier and less power-hungry. TK loves rules - he loves to interpret them, and to implement them on behalf of the BOSS. I'm glad this is only teh internets and not real life. human be in 20:31, 2 June 2007 (CDT)


 * In about ten years, he'll have a job downsizing people for Wal-Mart. :( --Gulik 21:20, 2 June 2007 (CDT)
 * Ya think? He seems to be unemployed in the SW desert.... probably secure in his situation and not needing a job.  Yup, I dunnit again, made a red link I have to fucking write about... human be in 21:54, 2 June 2007 (CDT)

References to the USC
I think it would be nice to put a section talking about the USC sections that are up on the page, and even the now at least one year old discussion regarding the applicability of 18 USC § 1430 (might be wrong, I'm quoting numbers from memory). Even PJR goes so far as to post that he doesn't believe that vandalism is a violation of that specific law. When a direct answer is posted: "It seems that we're in agreement that the reference should be struck, can it get done?" the response is a simple and stern: "no [go fuck yourself]". Totally classic CP that deserves mention. Oh, as well, the deal with harassment only deals with "obscenity or child pornography" or telephones, so cyberharassment would not qualify... unless you're doing things like goatse, or 2girls1cup, lolichan. -- 13:31, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Rule number 6
So are #authorised# wiki-bots 'allowed' or 'promoted'? Anna Livia (talk) 16:47, 12 February 2019 (UTC)