Debate:Who is the biggest idiot at CP?/Ed's Page

Image grabbed before DaBoss could alter the typo delete it: sorry:

Can't stop grinning

Congratulations Ed!

This is to certify that Edward Poor was voted CONSERVAPEDIA'S BIGGEST IDIOT By RationalWiki, on June 30, 2008

Latter Day Saints

I haven't followed all this, but the responses by "Ultimahero" to me were unsatisfactory. I told him that if he wanted to express the doctrine of someone else's church, then he should bring in a leader of that church to do so. Quoting from people who were members or even leaders of the church long ago, or even today, is not the way to explain church doctrine.

It's inherently unreliable and non-encyclopedic for a critic of a church to try to explain its doctrine. No encyclopedia should allow such an absurdity.--Aschlafly 16:17, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

He was quoting the founder of mormonism, and top leaders. If there was a change in church belief it should be easy t find proof of such. --Tim (CPAdmin1)^{talk Vote in my NEW polls} 16:24, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Such quotes are meaningless. Were they expressing personal opinions, or church doctrine? Did the church approve what they said? Has church doctrine changed since they said it? I trust you see the flaws now. Anyone who has an ax to grind against a particular church (or group of church members) should not grind it here.--Aschlafly 17:15, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

Rules

Warnings and blocks are not made as punishments; I'm not interested in justice per se but in helping the project along. Rules are not entitlements to be as annoying as possible. Help us or be elsewhere. --Ed Poor ^Talk 16:55, 28 June 2008 (EDT)

How Is Floating-Point Important?

You deleted an entry I created on Harlan Coben. It's an encyclopedia, and since he's a fairly prolific and wide-selling author, noteworthy enough for an encyclopedia. How are floating-point, Colne, or conker appropriate for an encyclopedia while Coben isn't? Or even more applicable--Robert Ludlum, Paul A. Fisher or William Gibson? I would've appreciated either a message first letting me know you were planning on deleting it, or an AFD tag so I could've defended the entry. I take the time to put in a non-controversial entry, and it gets tossed down the can. I think you can understand the frustration. --Jareddr 00:06, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

I certainly support restoring the article. Ed, are you one of those deletionists? HenryS 14:06, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Ed, just want to give you another opportunity to respond and let me know about this matter. To take the time and put together an entry, rather than "talk, talk, talk", and have it reverted, is very frustrating. I am inclined to restore the article, but hesitate to do so without at least a response from you. Thanks! --Jareddr 19:55, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Altering archives and user-pages

You reverted my change to your archive 12 with the comment "No one is allowed to alter archives". Well, actually, there is no such rule. What does exist is a convention that discussions are not continued in archives. But that doesn't mean that no alterations can be made to archives at all. In the last day or so I added an {{unsigned}} comment to one. One could also add an archive notice, or (as I thought of doing but never done) a link to the previous and next archives. Also, sometimes talk-page comments are added to an existing archive rather than a new one being created. Additionally, sometimes, particularly when discussions are archived prematurely, discussions are removed from an archive back to a talk page. My point is that it's not true and not appropriate to claim that archives can never be altered. There are some legitimate reasons for doing so, and I felt my reason in this case were legitimate, and you haven't explained why they were not.

The point of an archive is to reduce the size of a talk page by removing old discussions from it. So it goes against this to archive a discussion and retain it on the talk page, as you have done with Floating Point section above. That is why I removed that section from the archive. I could, alternatively, have removed it from your talk page, but as it was a very recent, and possibly unfinished, discussion, I opted for removing it from the archive. And leaving it both on the talk page and in the archive will likely mean that it will end up being archived twice, which is also pointless.

Archiving a conversation and leaving part of it on the talk page is similarly problematic. Again, you will likely have the problem that that part will end up getting archived twice, as though it was two separate conversations. Secondly, as I put in my edit comment, leaving part of a conversation here in such as way as to make it look like a claim wasn't answered could be considered deceitful. As you have not otherwise explained that action, that suspicion becomes stronger. You don't want to appear to be deceitful, do you?

Philip J. Rayment 21:52, 29 June 2008 (EDT)

Block

I find it odd that you are lecturing me on maturity while you called my message to you "harassment". That does disturb me and I am shocked that you have such audacity as an administrator. Before I take your [dubious] advice, why don't you start with taking it yourself by not using personal remarks such as saying that I am harassing? That is certainly not mature. Nor is blocking a user simply because of a personal bias. Otherwise, I would like to know why I was blocked when User:Bugler was the one who started with virulent personal remarks directed at me. A mature person wouldn't block a user after that user asked another user to refrain from directing invective comments at himself. Unless you are willing to demonstrate maturity yourself, I won't take your last comment to me seriously. Would you like to resolve this in an polite manner (because I know I would, too), or would you like to block me again with a summary containing the subtext more invective rhetoric? Kilmarnock 22:10, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Throwing this[1] in, I didn't realise that you refused to allow User:Bugler to come to terms with the invective comments he made. I certainly hope that this kind of censorship from you doesn't demonstrate the kind of maturity you were discussing earlier. Kilmarnock 22:13, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

Name change

Hello, Aschlafly asked me to get a name change, could you help me with that please. I would like to use my initials which are B.E.E , thank you. Dotherightthing 22:18, 30 June 2008 (EDT)

My name has already changed, sorry for disturbing you. BenE 23:16, 30 June 2008 (EDT)