Conservapedia talk:Sysops

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search



Non-funny vandalism[edit]

I'll consider any further attempts to move conversation from this page back to the article page to be non-funny vandalism, and will block accordingly. --jtltalk 15:24, 15 June 2007 (CDT)

  • LOL...who gives a fuck what you think, vandal/cyber terrorist. I guess it can no longer be argued or disputed, since the Los Angeles Times says it true! Since the reporter says you admitted it, Jtl. Now you should consider taking your puny little dick and your shitty little mind, and get into therapy. --TK/MyTalk 06:46, 19 June 2007 (CDT)
As long as she also says that Conservapedia blocks because of ideological differences, I can live with that. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 07:37, 19 June 2007 (CDT)
Funny, but she never quite says that, does she? לול 08:19, 19 June 2007 (CDT)
The LA Times says what is true? That I'm a 'vandal/cyber terrorist'? I'm not mentioned in the article at all. The reporter says I "admitted" what? I sincerely doubt she says I admitted vandalism or terrorism, since I did no such thing. --jtltalk 13:14, 19 June 2007 (CDT)
I don't disagree with the sentiment of the block, however, should we let the aggrieved party do the blocking? --DoxXox-DawkT0wk 13:19, 19 June 2007 (CDT)
That's a reasonable question, but this probably isn't the best place to discuss it -- meet me over at RationalWiki talk:Community Standards? --jtltalk 13:27, 19 June 2007 (CDT)

CP Sysop Identities[edit]

It doesn't need to be published here but for those who are interested, Stephanie Simon's article in the LA Times about Conservapedia reveals the real identity and location of Karajou. While my guess about the age of a young female sysop that likes Irish dancing (whose mother asked not to reveal her name), was spot on.

Get a life. Pretty soon you lot are going to have to get over the CP thing and do something to justify your claims of superior reasoning, worldly knowledge and scientific rationality - ie quit vandalizing and cyber stalking and express your ideas and knowledge in an accessible way as articles on this site. The reason why I have only contempt for most of you here is not because you challenge the YEC or other Biblical approach to some matters, it is because of your hypocrisy and hate. You throw out your motivation as wanting to protect "high school aged kids" from CP "ideology" yet do it by filling CP with obscenity. Way to care about the forming of young minds and attitudes! You are fledgling EngSoc, aiming to stamp out any thought that doesn't fit your template. You are everything you claim to hate about CP. That should shame some of you, through whose (non-vandal) writings it is plainly discernible are talented and gifted thinkers. But you are all being dragged down to the level of that moron Icewedge, or will end up bitter and twisted like CatWatcher (who still licks butt via a sock over at CP - I know who you are, teacher's pet), who can't bear to have their world view challenged and - shock! horror! - disproved occasionally. CP isn't your ideology - but why does that mean you have to destroy it? They blocked you, deleted your dissent, etc. Is that really justification to do all this? Rational people would take this wiki and use it to make available articles that challenged CPs articles constructively, offered opposite views. Instead, you all sit and fester and marinade in your own hate. (Well, not all, there are a couple that I see are trying to get some constructive content posted here.) I don't necessarily agree with the viewpoints of all of the articles on CP, but I agree that they have the right to hold those opinions and the right to have a vehicle for expressing them, and that's a right I will fight for. Similarly, your vehicle is RationalWiki (or even Wikipedia), but right now this is a beaten up old chevy with FUK! spraypointed on the hood, 3 or 4 crazies all grabbing at the steering wheel, and nobody knowing (or caring, apparently) where its actually going. לול 05:00, 19 June 2007 (CDT)
It's (the Chevy) actually moving? I thought it was up on blocks in the front yard? Huh, wonders! CЯacke® 07:47, 19 June 2007 (CDT)
As an aside, even in an isolated, rural environment, I knew more profanity at the age of 12 than the entirety of the vandalism on CP. And yet it never harmed me, and I've always been known as very polite and agreeable in person. In fact, I never swore once in front of either parent until I was in my late 20's. I doubt profanity is nearly as harmful as you seem to think. --Kels 08:06, 19 June 2007 (CDT)
It isn't that I believe it is incredibly harmful, Kels, so much as I believe it is counter-productive and hypocritical when used as a tactic to protect children's minds :/ לול 08:17, 19 June 2007 (CDT)
Protecting children’s' minds? That statement reminds me about a conversation I had with a person in their 20's about STDs. She grew up in VA in a very conservative community and was not informed about STDs other than once you got one your life was going to end (how the community protected the children’s' minds). I had to explain to her the differences in Bacterial STDs and Viral STDs and how there are treatments and prevention methods for each. I also recounted a situation where a male contracted syphilis at a young age but since his family was of a similar conservative mindset like the lady from VA, he did not feel able to admit to his parents that he had intercourse at a young age nor did he ask to see a Dr. to check out the changes he noticed until it was to late for the treatment to reverse the effects of the syphilis. So are we really protecting children by hiding the world away or are we enabling them to be harmed through ignorance?--TimS 08:41, 19 June 2007 (CDT)
That might be a nice article to do, perhaps using the HPV Vaccine as a starting point. I'm not sure what kind or article vs essay we could come up with.--PalMD-yada yada 08:44, 19 June 2007 (CDT)

That's moving away from my original point quite some distance, though. Firstly, it is RW who claim to be the guardians of the innocent high schoolers; secondly, why is CP "hiding the world away"? If these kids are accessing the internet, they are a couple of clicks away from all the information you allude to. This is why RW worries me so much - there is a mindset among you that CP is somehow attempting to supplant all other sources of information. It isn't! Its attempting to create a conservative, Christian-friendly, family-friendly online encyclopedia that exists as an alternative, a 2nd opinion, so to speak. And in that aim, it deserves to succeed, and "liberals", of all people, should laud it for its intentions to present a break from the mainstream. You don't have to like it, you don't have to believe it. Nobody is asking that of you - what they are asking is for the right to freedom of expression of their beliefs. Are all viewpoints equal (but some more equal than others..?) I have a difficult enough time already with my family, trying to ensure that my children are true to their heritage as Jews, without indoctrinating them that messianism is the be all and end all. I can tell them that is what I believe, but they will eventually be of an age, like my eldest daughter, to decide for themselves. As it happens, she chose to disagree, now lives in Israel and is an orthodox frum :D The point I'm trying (and maybe failing) to make is that if all of your efforts were focused on construction instead of destruction, I'd be a lot happier. And so would you all - this "war" is gonna give everyone ulcers :P לול 09:07, 19 June 2007 (CDT)

There was an article written by a person at UC Berkley about the conservative mindset and liberal mindset and how the two mindsets would fail if let to their own with out parts of the other. Basically with out a foundation (conservative) the free thought would not have room to grow (liberal) and therefore progress would not occur. It is not the issue of CP existing as much as it is the spread of false information and severely biased information from CP. The majority of their edits are of a political nature causing the website to indoctrinate its viewers with false information that is easily spreadable. The Wedge strategy offered by the Discovery Institute is about how reaching out to a young crowd can their goals be achieved. What has been accomplished by ID coming into the science class room? A failure to understand what science is and what is not. How does this effect society? Short term it does little but long term the affect can be felt as the number of productive scientists decrease and the mindset of "godidit" so there is no reason to explore and therefore discoveries are diminished. These are the issues that are developed by this suppression and biased view of the world, retardation of society’s ability to go beyond status quo. I am fine with alternative views, I am not ok with blatant falsehoods and cover-ups that are politically motivated to sway people into a false understanding that they continue to spread. That is the issue with Andy's website, that it can easily spread false information in the guise of truth. If the CP commandments were followed then this would not be an issue but for a fact, commandment number 1 is often ignored. As such when a person superficially views the commandments and website they glean a false impression of what the site offers and thus spread said information. If CP did not have misleading rules then this would not be an issue but as it stands their rules portray them as a trustworthy encyclopedia that can be used to educate children. Well trustworthy in this case means worthy of a biased and limited mindset with a copious disregard to factual evidence.--TimS 10:04, 19 June 2007 (CDT)

True, I grew up in a very conseravtive community as well but broke away from the norm because of the need to understand things. I had an argument with my mother three weeks ago about corn and how humans had cross bred different types of grains to produce it, the sad thing is that my parents are farmers and understand cross breeding. They just did not want to see that evolution is something that happens, either directed or undirected.--TimS 08:51, 19 June 2007 (CDT)
I think RW has evolved quite a bit from RW 1.0 and vandalism. The more content we add, the better.--PalMD-yada yada 08:13, 19 June 2007 (CDT)
I will offer this point (which probably won't help): Perhaps the wiki-concept doesn't work so well for such an ideologically-driven project, one that promotes a point of view and actively dismisses those who do not share that point of view. Any wiki requires the contributions of fairly anonymous, volunteer editors, after all, and requires that the editors self-govern themselves. There must be a buy-in to the system for it to work, and perhaps Conservapedia just can't maintain that buy-in. And a wiki requires cooperation and discussion which (by the 90/10 "rule") Conservapedia actively discourages. Sterile 10:22, 19 June 2007 (CDT)


Austin M is no longer a Sysop. SharonS posted this on his talk page:

Your Sysop privileges have been remove for the time being due our policy of de-syoping inactive Sysops. Hope all is well with you. ~ SharonTalk 08:24, 21 June 2007 (EDT)

He should be taken off the list, and little Debbie should be added. ~ Griffin 15:41, 22 June 2007 (CDT)

"little Debbie", heheheh. MyaR 16:02, 22 June 2007 (CDT)
The explosion of young girls as sysops there is a bit creepy, really. --Linus(plot evil tech) 16:04, 22 June 2007 (CDT)
If Conservapedia was a chat room Schalfly would be grooming. Tmtoulouse 16:09, 22 June 2007 (CDT)
It's pretty strange. I've been hanging out at the site for a while and all the promotions of girls are quite...suspicious. SharonS is mediocre at best, and yet she is a Bureaucrat instead of numerous other Sysops who are far superior. Now that Deborah and Bethany are Sysops, there don't appear to be any more of Schlafly's students up for promotion, so maybe the'll actually give Sysopship to someone who deserves it. ~ Griffin 17:13, 22 June 2007 (CDT)

List formatting and Crocoite[edit]

Shouldn't we convert the sysop list to the more flexible "#" notation list? Or is it this way to have the shiny blue box and different font? I left it for now, and it's not urgent, but I wanted to post the question here anyway.

Oh, and Crocoite left. Is this about the issue that also produced the hilarity about the "Christianity" template started by... Conservative, I think? Can somebody bring me up to speed or maybe write an article about it? It's kinda high-profile now, I'd say. I left him in the list for now since he still got his rights at the moment, though. --Sid 11:54, 29 June 2007 (CDT)

It is--PalMD-yada yada 12:29, 29 June 2007 (CDT)
Shouldn't Andy update his cp:Parthian shot examples now? --Kels 12:43, 29 June 2007 (CDT)
It's the same fundamental issue, but not about the template -- this time it flared up in the cp:John the Baptist page; Mormons believe JtB appeared to Joseph Smith and inducted him into the Aaronic priesthood. Non-Mormons don't. Fireworks ensue. --jtltalk 13:10, 29 June 2007 (CDT)
TK weighed in like an authoritarian parent. "Stop this bickering and go to your rooms". God's peed Babel fishÅЯ†ђŮŖ ÐΣй†Now look here! 13:34, 29 June 2007 (CDT)
You've got to sort of admire the style. "None of you are any better than anyone else, now do what I say because I'm better than you." Classic! --Kels 13:46, 29 June 2007 (CDT)
Although in the template debate you have to say he was taking the more reasonable position. -- Stevo (talk) 13:55, 29 June 2007 (CDT)

Joaquin Martinez[edit]

Looks like his e-penis is under question. Way to go with all those blocks. Particularly those who have just registered and have made no edits. Repeat after me, "THE POWER, IT FLOWS THROUGH ME!".


Karajou has packed his bags and left. What's happeing over there? ɱ@δ ɱ!ɳHello?/I did this! 01:12, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Holy shit! The world will be a better place, only less fun. ДιЯɖі$ɧ ɥοםЄʟβЯƏакĐΩωΝ 04:39, 2 July 2007 (CDT)\
WTF????--PalMD-yada yada 16:06, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Last edit before leaving: 20:25, 30 June 2007 - White House

Then TK posted this message on his talk page (03:33, 1 July):

Is there anyway you can see clear to not hide those? Restore or copy them to everyone? If you mistrust me, please don't invite me. If you do, please respect me enough not to delete things so I cannot seem them. Thanks, Brian!

And then, less than 24 hours later & no further contributions or (visible) exchanges, he was gone! --Robledo 17:27, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Also, interestingly, he "goned" hisself. The blanking and replacement with the retired template was done by kangaroo, not some other tool. I wonder if he plans to join us on the light side? humanbe in 17:30, 2 July 2007 (CDT)
Surely he'll be back though? They always go back -- Stevo (talk) 17:30, 2 July 2007 (CDT)
"Leaving and never coming back" never applies to cp, even for those who are banned.--PalMD-yada yada 17:44, 2 July 2007 (CDT)
What? No Parthian shot? ʄĹїþþїɲ;-) 18:18, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Apparently, in the fallout from the TK e-mail scandal, RobS and TK have been screaming at each other for days, and my guess is Karajou got tired of it and just resigned his commission. Good riddance. I swear, whether he means to or not, TK's destroying Conservapedia. Also, to whoever just edit conflict'd me, you better submit a "writing plan" before editing again, bitch.-αmεσG 18:19, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Game on, bitch ;) ʄĹїþþїɲ;-) 12:59, 3 July 2007 (CDT)
I haven't been keeping up. What's the [[TK Email Scandal]]? --Gulik 13:14, 3 July 2007 (CDT)
I want to know, too. ʄĹїþþїɲ;-) 13:24, 3 July 2007 (CDT)
Does this have something to do w/ TK deleting all his talk page archives? ʄĹїþþїɲ;-) 13:28, 3 July 2007 (CDT)
Basically summed up like this -

"Now I have become TK;

destroyer of Websites."

(some sort of award to whoever can find what I paraphrased the quote from, and who famously repeated it)

As far as I can tell, it involves Ames, an email containing an 'outing' of TK's activities here, and a mysterious North Californian. --ויִכִּ נתֶּרֶפּרֶתֵּר שְׁלֹום!

Does this have something to do with TK putting Fox up to permabanning PF Fox? I was kinda busy last night, so I wasn't paying attention here so much. --Kels 13:35, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

I believe it is an entirely different email scandal, although the former may have precipitated the one you mention. --ויִכִּ נתֶּרֶפּרֶתֵּר שְׁלֹום!

Oppenheimer, Bahgahvad Gita,...I am become death, detroyer of worlds--PalMD-Goatspeed! 13:38, 3 July 2007 (CDT) TK going to hide in the woods, too? I'm a little confused. Also, is this because they have none of us over their to argue with, they've finally begun to eat their own? ʄĹїþþїɲ;-) 13:39, 3 July 2007 (CDT)
It seems that Rob is asking quite a few questions about TK now... See here, here and here for recent examples I noticed. And he's pretty much engaging TK on multiple levels (PF Fox issue, Ray Martinez issue, Scientology issue...). I have no idea WTF is actually going on there, but it looks crazy. --Sid 14:53, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Looks like Karajou is back. [1] [2] He lasted a whole day and a half. --Brian 14:54, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Dammit. I didn't even get to do a quick celebration dance. =( --Sid 14:56, 3 July 2007 (CDT)
I knew he could never pull off a LANCB.--PalMD-Goatspeed! 15:01, 3 July 2007 (CDT)
He's laughing at us? -- Stevo (talk) 15:12, 3 July 2007 (CDT)
I'm laughing at him laughing at us! Ha ha, I say! --Kels 15:45, 3 July 2007 (CDT)
Damn it--can't keep up! ŠтΈṜȳŁЁand...? 18:44, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

I think Kangaroo needs a baramin enema. Doc? Do you have your rubber hose handy? humanbe in 19:03, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Just to say... Karajou said he was retired, then he's back saying he was on vacation. One of these cannot be true. Is this the first documented case of conservative deceit? ДιЯɖі$ɧ ɥοםЄʟβЯƏакĐΩωΝ 11:47, 4 July 2007 (CDT)

Does anyone know if this was due to our friend Jeb?

(User creation log); 14:18 . . CowardsWeAreSPARTANS (Talk | contribs) (New user)

(User creation log); 14:21 . . KnowThisKarajou (Talk | contribs) (New user)

(User creation log); 14:26 . . WeAtRWAreDescended (Talk | contribs) (New user)

(User creation log); 14:33 . . FromHerculesHimself (Talk | contribs) (New user)

It sounds to me like the work of a /b/andal - do we have any of them here? --ויִכִּ נתֶּרֶפּרֶתֵּר שְׁלֹום!

On a slightly related note[edit]

anybody catch this bit of promotion? [3] ʄĹїþþїɲ;-) 13:44, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Yes I saw that, is there a link to his televised words of wisdom anywhere? ɱ@δ ɱ!ɳHello?/I did this! 15:17, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Roger Schlafly[edit]

He's not a sysop anymore... was he in the past? -Jayjay4ever 17:44, 13 September 2007 (MDT)

As I recall, yes. Can someone wayback machine the sysop user list maybe? Or search the user rights log for his user name? humanUser talk:Human 14:29, 30 November 2007 (EST)
Seems to be still a sysop. --AKjeldsenGodspeed! 14:39, 30 November 2007 (EST)
Confirmation. Only ever made a sysop, no changes since then. humanUser talk:Human 14:45, 30 November 2007 (EST)

I'm probably missing something[edit]

But why was this locked? Locke User is Vandal/sysop Always Watching...... 00:49, 30 November 2007 (EST)

I'm guessing some junior lawyers don't like the truth, but inasmuch as Elmadri was also removed as a sysop the same time as Hoji, and for the same reason, both should be listed as removed/retired/forcibly retired for inactivity, which was the reason given, and the reason acknowledged by Hoji. --TK/MyTalk 01:56, 30 November 2007 (EST)

Mirror, mirror on the wall,...[edit]

...who is the, distant-second-to-Andy, craziest Conservapedia sysop of them all?[edit]

Active sysops[edit]

What about me? DanH 17:45, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

Table, perhaps?[edit]

Since CP has so many different levels of "rights", perhaps we should present a table (sysops at the top) of all the various privs and powers users have? ħumanUser talk:Human 02:18, 13 July 2008 (EDT)

Did anyone mention that on CP, sysops are now "administrators"?[edit]

The two terms have always been synonymous on wikis. ħumanUser talk:Human 02:51, 11 October 2008 (EDT)

but haven't they changed the name? I'm sure I remember people there being "sysop"s. SusanG  ContribsTalk 10:44, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
Maybe, but see my point above. Back in the day TK referred to sysops as admins, etc. As I said, the two terms are synonymous on most wikis. Here, of course, sysop = janitor = bucket of warm pigslop, so perhaps we see it differently? Anyway, if CP actually changed the "user right" name, sure, that's news - I guess? ħumanUser talk:Human 01:32, 12 October 2008 (EDT)
OK, yeah, [4] they have "renamed" the group. However, the software still calls them "pigs", sorry, I mean, "pigslops". Eh, CP is all about authority and power anyway, I'm surprised Andy didn't call them "Party Officials". ħumanUser talk:Human 01:34, 12 October 2008 (EDT)


Just wandering around the oooold archives over there, and found this little gem. Apparently he's been active under that name as recently as October. --Kels 18:09, 13 December 2008 (EST)

Warning for Sutler TK?[edit]

Shouldn't this section be at the /TK article, not here? Speculating randomly about one particular person here doesn't seem to fit the "overview" style of the article. ħumanUser talk:Human 17:03, 22 December 2008 (EST)


Why don't we have an article on him/her? --<choose> <option>Input The ResistorOutput</option> <option>CoyoteOver 450 pages watched NOT including talk pages</option> <option>The Trickster</option> <option>Acionyx</option> 18:00, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

admin blocks[edit]

I can't find a single admin account that hasn't been blocked three or four times, when checking logs at their user contrib page. Wtf is that all about? Fox82 (talk) 19:42, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Some (oh so obvious) parodists got block rights (by emulating Andy or TK) and went out with a bang by mass-hammering sysops. And sometimes, sysops block each other, though then it's either a mistake (clicked "Block" in the wrong line in the Recent Changes), for the lulz (rare), or asserting power over each other. That last case is rare now (since pretty much all the remaining sysops are now fully loyal to TK or are wise enough not to get in his way), though. --Sid (talk) 20:56, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
It appears that atleast once TK had to unblock himself after a range block. His rationale for excessive range block is insane, that it is proof that whole world is turning against him and is full of liberals. Fox82 (talk) 19:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)


Is anyone here familiar with the technical aspects of monobook.js? TK's monobook page includes things that are obviously used in blocking and other admin actions. This does not seem to be the case with wikipedia, admins monobook pages include nothing of the sort. Would deleting or adding of this info have any effect without sysop status? Is there a better place to discuss such things?Fox82 (talk) 18:58, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I think a better place to bring it up would be over here, where we talk about CONservapedia in general. Lord of the Goons The official spikey-haired skeptical punk 19:02, 15 February 2010 (UTC)


That's what categories are for. Would anyone mind if I moved all the subpages out into cp-space? -- Nx / talk 15:55, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

not even slightly: excellent idea. 15:58, 17 March 2010 (UTC) SusanGContribsTalk
Very good idea. I've long been confused by the puzzled by the sub page thing. --ConcernedresidentAsk me about your mother 16:00, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Sysop lists[edit]

The fact that there are two lists of sysops might be confusing to newcomers. Maybe we should get rid of the second list and pull the active sysops out of the first?--CentimeterINCHES 13:48, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Ok, no response... I'll just do it and see.--CentimeterINCHES 23:38, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


i remember a section about the sysops on wikipedia did it get deleted? Nailo1 (talk) 18:23, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Ill advised revert of "clueless idiot"[edit]

This revert ends up screwing all the hard werk had done in this edit. The edit summary was needlessly harsh, it is little wonder that the former editor has voted against the "clueless idiot" in this week's cooping. Thanks. No, really, THANKS, lets all be bullies and hit the "clueless idiot" every chance we get. You people are beginning to sicken me. Fix it Refugee, it's your shitpile now. C®ackeЯ 05:02, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey Cracker, "all the hard work" he did in that edit? You must be joking. Rob S added an edit of one sentence - that was incorrect info that I had to fix. Rob's edit on July 20 about CP Sysop Taj stated: "Still active through User:Conservative since August 2011" when in fact Taj had already resigned from CP on July 8th - and if he had bothered to check Taj's CP User page before making that edit (I linked to it) it clearly showed this. So his edit was 100% WRONG and that's why I reverted it and that's why I called him a clueless idiot. That, plus the fact that he really pissed me off with his usual paranoid allegations - once again, in his own little way he insinuated that CP Sysop Taj is a sock of User:Conservative - which Rob has previously alleged in the past, which it certainly is NOT - which I know for a fact since I have been both Refugee at RW and Taj at CP since 2007, for the past 5 years and I am definitely not a sock of Conservative. So I corrected his edit, and was nice enough to then post the links to my user pages at RW and at CP on Rob's talk page here just to let him know. Rob is a freaking clueless idiot. Nothing to "fix" in that edit. Have a nice night. Refugeetalk page 05:52, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
You know what? You're more righteous than I in this case, I shoulda fixed things myself and not started anything. Mea culpa. Maybe it's just me but there level of civility here has gone down quite a ways. C®ackeЯ 06:03, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
What is there to fix? I pointed out that Rob's edit was WRONG. Taj had already resigned. So you want to change it back to the incorrect info he put in? One more thing, before you go around calling someone a bully you need to look at their edits. In my 5 years at RW and at CP in neither persona at any time have I ever "bullied" anyone. Please point out any diffs, remarks, links, comments, etc. that makes me out to be a bully. I've been polite, pleasant, and kind and have never even had a heated exchange with anyone until this past week when I got sick of RobS and his paranoid accusations. Look at what you wrote (I "sicken" you) yet you say I was needlessly harsh. You are right, the level of civility has gone down. Refugeetalk page 06:15, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Please cease being so self absorbed. C®ackeЯ 06:18, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Please try to be more polite and less accusatory. Oh, and it wouldn't hurt to admit when you are in the wrong. Refugeetalk page 06:20, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
You are correct. I was being a dick. I was wr, wro, wrong. I do apologize to you for the way I handled my end of things. I will try to be less of a dick in future dealing with you and other editors of this project. There. And hey, it only took a month! C®ackeЯ 03:11, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. :-) < smile. And a hug to you too. I'm surprised but pleased. It takes a lot to say those words sometimes. But now I have a headache because I have to rearrange the info in my brain to shift you from residing in my mad part to my ok part. (I realize that may not make sense). Refugeetalk page 08:00, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Another thing all sysops have in common...[edit]

Once they leave/are banned, they all insist it was someone else's fault Conservapedia has failed. I have not seen a one admit they did anything wrong. Success has a thousand fathers, and failure is an orphan. --TheLateGatsby (The end of the dock ) 17:51, 9 May 2013 (UTC)