Conservapedia talk:RobSmith

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon sociology.svg This article contains information about one or more living persons.

Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats.
Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed.
If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

This page is automatically archived by Archiver
Archives for this talk page: <1>

Hall of fame[edit]

Assange started out 10 years ago to dethrone Bush and thd neocon conspiracy. Obama and Hillary were supposed to complete the job, but flipped and used big gubmint and the NWO apparatus to persecute Assange. Trump now, commie lib that he is, sides with Assange. In 10 years, everyone has changed except Assange, who's been kept cryonically alive in the Ecuador embassey. The US government has slowly moved to Assange's position, except the CIA, which still wants to drone him.
—According to nobs: Trump is a communist, the NWO is real and Assange is Disney on ice.[1]

This is a dump of the worst best recent nobs quotes, which haven't found use in his article (yet) but are too good to pass up in the long run. Note that the quotes below are given IN FULL (as opposed to being quote mined) with just two exceptions (for reasons of brevity). Top picks so far include:

On your closest allies[edit]

On the goddamn reds[edit]

On reason vs faith[edit]

On women ruining the environment[edit]

On lies, lies everywhere[edit]

On the white man's burden[edit]

On men's rights[edit]

On Big Pharma/psychology woo[edit]

On civilization vs Eurabia[edit]

On Atheists[edit]

On Class in America[edit]

On Anal Fun and the Decline of the Species[edit]

References[edit]

Bongolian: harassment[edit]

Here's ths facts: Bongolian doesn't like the current rewrite I'm doing of CP's Democratic Party article, so he's filling this entry up with all kinds of non-sense (like the "evidence" he presented in the Coop yesterday - that me debunking UFO's and Qanon makes me sligned with UFO believers and Qanon. That link came straight from this page.

If we're going to have attack pages, shouldn't some or most of it have some basis in fact? nobs piss in my ear 20:05, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

1) I've never read your Democratic Party article on Conservapedia and have no desire to. I try to stay out of your cesspool as much as possible. 2) I'm happy to rewrite or delete the Expolitics section of this page. Bongolian (talk) 20:09, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
What about the racism and bigotry crap? You got no evidence there.nobs piss in my ear 20:19, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
I just updated the QAnon section. I didn't write most of the bigotry section. I organized it and added the antisemitism section. I stand by the antisemitism section. If there's something in the rest of the bigotry section that you object to and that you have evidence that it's erroneous, let me know and I will take a look at it. Bongolian (talk) 20:31, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
I gave you my objection. You wanna take this straight to the coop? nobs piss in my ear 20:37, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
I undid the stuff that was done, and protected the article for no reason because Bongolian can still edit it. But it would be a good idea to discuss first whether adding all that stuff is actually a good idea or not, especially given the huge flame war that just happened which all this seems to be based on. NekoDysk 20:52, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
Nobs: You've got 3 choices. 1) Take me to the coop. 2) Point out whatever is erroneous in my most recent edits,[1] and I will fix them if warranted. 3) Do nothing and I will restore the edits that I made. I don't care which one. @Dysklyver Bongolian (talk) 21:02, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────It is notable that this page called you out as a racist since 2012 when you yourself edited the page.[2] As I've said before if there are any details that are demonstrably erroneous, I'm happy to fix them. I'm not going to whitewash the page however. @Dysklyver @RobSmith Bongolian (talk) 21:28, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Ok, from the top:

  • the first few bits added to lead seem good.
  • wtf is a "client solicitor for an accountant"?
  • I don't have a clue what the caveat emptor bit is supposed to add.
  • nobs isn't capitalized.
  • don't create section titles literally as "racist", "bigot" and "Antisemite".
  • " Nobs even questioned whether the Obamas were even married by calling her a "domestic partner". " - dafug is this?
  • much of the corrections and additions to the middle section seem fine.
  • " Despite wasting countless hours editing Conservapedia, the cesspool of bigotry, Nobs decided he has still more time to waste by trolling hapless Rationalwikians on talk pages and the SaloonBar... " - gee, personal attack much?
  • the "Bearing false witness" section seems pretty dubious.
  • the categories that were added seem wack, transphobe, Atheophobe, communist?

Explain this. NekoDysk 22:18, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

If you want to have a go at editing the page, you're welcome to it as far as I'm concerned, @Dysklyver. Nobs' stated claim employment was finding clients for an accountant. That's all I know. Bongolian (talk) 22:56, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
You don't mind too much if I put back about 90% of what you added, probably minus the bits I mention above? NekoDysk 23:06, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
That's probably reasonable from my perspective. Bongolian (talk) 23:13, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
@Dysklyver, would you mind editing the page as you had indicated that you would? Bongolian (talk) 19:20, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
I forgot, feel free to carry on. NekoDysk 00:07, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
OK thanks, @Dysklyver! Bongolian (talk) 07:44, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

What is Bongolian claiming now, that by the grace and mercy of the Nazi's Soros survived because he was only 13 years old? That is holocaust revisionism. nobs piss in my ear 21:28, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

And Bongolian's own citations refute the slanders he's placed in this page. Do we need to go over those one-by-one? I had no idea the Nazi's were so compassionate until I read Bongolian's additions to this page. nobs piss in my ear 23:26, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
One is even left with impression, according to Bongolian, the Nazi's had a sense of justice since Soros was only 13. nobs piss in my ear 23:32, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

For example, let's see what Bongolian's cite says about victim blaming:

6. PREPARATION: Victims are identified and separated out because of their ethnic or religious identity. Death lists are drawn up. Members of victim groups are forced to wear identifying symbols. Their property is expropriated. They are often segregated into ghettoes, deported into concentration camps..."

None of that happened to Soros, by Soros own admission. Why did the Nazi's allow a "victim" to be a "spectator" to expropriation of property? Reich laws explicitly forbad unauthorized persons from access to expropriated property. nobs piss in my ear 23:43, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

More bullshit[edit]

Out of 30,000+ edits, you could not find a dozen cites to Breitbart.com and WND. You, Bongolian are making this shit up out of your asshole. Wanna take this to coop? nobsI'm all yea'res 22:54, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

@Bongolian Nowhere did I use Brietbart, WND, or Corsi. I attempted to resolve the dispute with McClatchy and American Thinker.[1][2]
  1. Joondeph, Brian, "Obama Was the Original Birther", American Thinker, September 18, 2016.
  2. "2 Clinton supporters in ’08 reportedly shared Obama ‘birther’ story," McClatchyDC, Sept. 16, 2016
Please inform yourself of the facts and revise the false information and conclusions you have inserted about a living person. nobsI'm all yea'res 05:05, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Edit War, RobSmith v. Bongolian[edit]

This vote is to determine which user's version of this article we should implement, the one preferred by nobs or Bongolian. For further context, see the above topic, as well as RationalWiki talk: All things in moderation#Bongolian, again. In order to maintain good faith, I will lower the protection level of the article to admins-only, with the assumption that the page will not be edited until the vote is concluded. Violation of this by anyone will result in the restoration of Moderator-only protection and a 9-hour block. The vote will close seven days from now. RoninMacbeth (talk) 06:37, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Question: Should I produce my preferred version here on Talk?9 nobsI'm all yea'res 06:52, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Yes please. RoninMacbeth (talk) 06:56, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

RobSmith's Preferred Version and Defense[edit]

"Nobs position on the Birther movement is somewhat ambiguous. While he cleaned up some of the outrageous and controversial statements by rabid birthers on CP,[1] he paraphrases Dr. Jerome Corsi and refers to the Obama birth certificate as an "alleged forgery" and says "The document bares[sic] a watermark; watermarks were not available in 1961. An original has never been produced."[2] FactCheck.org debunked Corsi.[3]

Nobs uses the notorious American Thinker to claim "The birther movement was started by Obama himself,."[4][5] and cites McClatchyDC for a claim the birther allegation was spread by Clinton operatives."[6]


  • Comment: While my first choice is to leave the section out completely, in compromise I wrote this from a detached third person perspective, keeping in mind RW's target audience. I made a SPOV reference to American Thinker cause I know RW's already got a hit piece on them. It could also include something like, "Corsi is currently suing the U.S government for $350 million" to make Corsi look like a nutcase if so desired, depending how that lawsuit turns out. The subhead and category on Birtherism I deem objectionable, but somebody eventually will probably try to do it anyway. The racist categorization has got to go.
Bongolian has produced absolutely nothing to justify the term 'racism' in the text or categorization, uses totally irrelevant references to Brietbart, then claims that I disagree with Brietbart, while in the same breath saying I never cited Brietbart. I can't follow his convoluted thinking. nobsI'm all yea'res 07:38, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Bongolian's Preferred Version and Defense[edit]

Nobs equivocated on the Obama citizenship denial (birtherism), which is inherently a racist movement.[1][2][3] While Nobs has removed some of other people's overt birtherism from Conservapedia after it was no longer much of an issue (late in Obama's second term, circa September 2016).[4] In contrast, Nobs also paraphrased conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi and referred to the Obama birth certificate as an "alleged forgery", stating that "The document bares[sic] a watermark; watermarks were not available in 1961. An original has never been produced."[5] FactCheck.org has debunked Corsi (and therefore Nobs) regarding this claim.[6]

Nobs used the crank publication American Thinker to falsely claim "The birther movement was started by Obama himself."[7][8] The image under which that statement appears came from Breitbart.com, as it has the Breitbart watermark on it.[7] That image came from a 1991 promotional booklet written by Obama's literary agency, which stated that he was born in Kenya. Neither Andrew Breitbart, nor Breitbart.com were birthers, and the literary agent who wrote the information stated that it was an error and did not come from information provided by Obama.[9]

Nobs cited a false report published by McClatchy that birtherism was spread by Hillary Clinton operatives.[10] The McClatchy report was debunked by PolitiFact.[11]

This is a more thorough description of Nobs' activities regarding birtherism, and attempts to address his concerns regarding Breitbart.

The problem with allowing Nobs' text as it stands:

  1. It does not acknowledge that birtherism is racism. I have added three citations that say as much, including General Colin Powell who said it. If Nobs' text is accepted as enshrined without any mention of racism, that's problematic because our own page on birtherism calls it a racist phenomenon. Second unless Nobs presents evidence of his removing birtherism from Conservapedia long before 2016, it actually is just whitewashing the Conservapedia because birtherism was becoming moot by that point.
  2. "Dr." of fucking political Jerome Corsi? Credentialist extraordinaire, when will he be performing surgery on my gall bladder? We don't allow this shit elsewhere, Nobs shouldn't be able to shove it in.
  3. Nobs gives nothing to dispute crank website American Thinker, so he basically gets to propagate his conspiracy theory viewpoint here.
    • So? (A) take "Dr." out (if you like denying facts) (B) so we're back to the 'opposing Obamacare is racism' argument, again. You know how that turned out. (C) The big problem you have is, you claim Britebart isn't racist (they're not birthers), yet Nobs is - with no evidence. nobsI'm all yea'res 02:08, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
    The only Nobs is guilty of is writing on the subject, seeking NPOV language, and posting at CP. You call me a racist for reigning in the alleged rampant birtherism at CP. You do a disservice to Rationalwiki in doing so. nobsI'm all yea'res 02:18, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
    And this is total bull, "after it was no longer much of an issue (late in Obama's second term, circa September 2016)" because I had been banned from CP for 3 years while birtherism was in full bloom. nobsI'm all yea'res 02:22, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Implement nobs's version[edit]

#Aye. Wizard's hat.svgÜbermensch Pierce through the wonder of amazement at the ubermensch 08:19, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

You might want to read my version, which was added after your vote, @Ubermensch. Bongolian (talk) 20:31, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
My version essentially says the same thing without all the fluff and easily disprovable exaggerations. nobsI'm all yea'res 21:32, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

#Yes. Commie Lib (talk) 20:22, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

See my problems with Nobs' text above. Bongolian (talk) 23:51, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Implement Bongolian's version[edit]

  1. Obviously. Bongolian (talk) 19:54, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
  2. Hard to imagine a case for this being inaccurate or unfair given the content of the citations. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 20:06, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
  3. Seems like a fair assessment to me. Cosmikdebris (talk) 21:35, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
  4. I have to go for this one. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 00:50, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
  5. Changed my mind. Commie Lib (talk) 01:23, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
  6. Changed my mind as well. Wizard's hat.svgÜbermensch Pierce through the wonder of amazement at the ubermensch 07:45, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
  7. Yeah Bongolians latest version seems fine to me. NekoDysk 11:51, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
  8. Definitely this version. Spud (talk) 11:56, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
  9. The superior version. Pizza SLICE.gifDuceMoosoliniYour friendly RW dictator moderator 14:21, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
  10. As it stands, is better than nobs' version. RoninMacbeth (talk) 03:31, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

  • Such a shame. I thought this page was reasonably accurate up til now. Now it's been hijacked by extremists for a political agenda that conflicts with Rationalwiki's stated mission. nobsI'm all yea'res 15:56, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
    So you thought the part about engaging in Holocaust denialism was accurate then? Bongolian (talk) 20:46, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
    Why don't you just round it out with CoprophiliacWikipedia's W.svg and pedophilia to simplify things. nobsI'm all yea'res 00:30, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
    That's your call. If you have some evidence, let me know. Bongolian (talk) 00:35, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @RoninMacbeth Sorry I thought Nobs had essentially conceded. Feel free to keep the vote open as long as you see fit. Bongolian (talk) 03:49, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
    Can we close this vote now, @RoninMacbeth? No one's voted in 3 days. Bongolian (talk) 20:02, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
    I doubt that 11 people will suddenly come along and vote for nobs's version, so sure. RoninMacbeth (talk) 20:09, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the shout out[edit]

Rob Smith is now a recognized expert cited by the notorious tin-foil hat site Sorcha Faal linking to Rob's EXCLUSIVE exposé on the cp:Clinton Body Count. [3] nobsI'm all yea'res 22:09, 21 March 2019 (UTC)j

see like minded peeps appreciate ur work EK (talk) 22:39, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Warning, Haig's Law is in full effect here. Oxyaena Harass 22:55, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Another factual innacuracy[edit]

Victor Thorn is not cited as a source in the cp:Clinton Body Count. Victor Thorn is listed as a victim. Redo it, Bongolian. nobsI'm all yea'res 04:30, 23 March 2019 (UTC)