Essay talk:The "wisdom" of PJR

I'm not sure why i did this. Maybe I'll make it an essay.--PalMD^{-If it looks like a donut, eat it} 18:20, 27 December 2007 (EST)

Wow, nice essay. PJR is probably the only one of them worth an essay: I mean, he alternates sensible thoughts with unbelievable (insert word here). The other Sysops, all of them, resemble trolls, and argue for the sake of it. Even Andy can't be seriously convinced of all that he writes - he just is in a war and in a war you must win by making points, not by expressing your inner feelings. He is (?) a lawyer and like a lawyer he makes his best for his client (his worldview and his income), regardless of what he considers the truth. Instead, I think that Philip really believes that crap, and you can't but feel compassion for him at times. But then his blindness makes him write things that make you think "how could I have compassion for him?".

He still is mostly civil, compared to the others. I wonder, how did User:Order get night editing? My suggestive idea was that Philip granted it for continuing their amazingly long debate, first on Talk:Moon and now on Talk:Theory of evolution.

Only problem with your essay is, a new one would be required almost every day. Cheers, Ed @^{but not the Poor one!} 13:59, 8 January 2008 (EST)

Dare I say that this should be considered for Best of RationalWiki? --Edgerunner⁷⁶ 14:42, 8 January 2008 (EST)

A truly wonderful collection!--IcewedgeJr 17:19, 13 October 2008 (EDT)