User talk:Aschlafly

From Conservapedia

Contents 1 Post Comments Here 2 Name based blocks 3 Favorite Music? 4 Question: 5 Explanation/apology 6 Math articles 7 Crazy thinking 8 That Comment 9 Liberal traits 10 Fort Hood Request 11 Two usernames on the same IP

Post Comments Here

Andy, just a quick message. User:GeorgeH has, accidentally or not, scrambled the main talk page (here). Because of further edits, I don't know how to undo it, so I thought I'd bring it to your attention. JohnFraiser 09:17, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

Thanks, I fixed it. It could have been an accident by GeorgeH, I suppose. We'll give him the benefit of the doubt.--Andy Schlafly 09:38, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

Name based blocks

Hello, I was just curious about the spate of blocks I've seen from yourself and other admins here whereby people using aliases have been blocked instantly with the comment "Please recreate your account with your real first name and last initial". This seems a little harsh, as a lot of people prefer to remain anonymous on the internet, and secondly I note that a lot of the admins themselves do not adhere to this rule, such as TK (who has been very useful and polite to me in the past) and "Conservative". I was wondering if you thought perhaps this rule may be driving potential useful editors away from the site? MattS 19:01, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

This isn't Wikipedia, where anonymity can be used to cover up wrongdoing or deceit, or a user name can be dreamed up to try to make a point. If someone is contributing legitimately here and the name doesn't reflect an ax to grind, then we're flexible. But if not, then let's see a real first name and last initial. There's no legitimate reason to hide that.--Andy Schlafly 19:07, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

I agree with you in requiring people to register, but the fact is people could just make up a name if they really wanted to, and therefore the people with good intentions for the project who use a common alias when contributing to internet based applications will not return when they get blocked outright. At the end of the day it is your decision, and you are obviously free to set the rules as you see fit, but I fear you may be scaring off useful people with an essentially pointless restriction. MattS 19:13, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

If they are contributing legitimately, as I said, and if their name is not some misguided statement, they should not be blocked. Also, there is an appeal process.

We're not trying to be like Wikipedia or other internet sites, which quickly degenerate into idiotic statements or hoaxes by people hiding behind anonymous names.--Andy Schlafly 19:19, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

Fair enough. I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm expressing concerns for the good of the site. If you feel the process does not deter contributions then I will go with your judgement. MattS 19:21, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

The rule is made clear on the signup page, and legitimate users almost always happily recreate their accounts to follow the rules or discuss the matter by email. Those who don't are overwhelmingly vandals, and blocking proactively saves a lot of trouble. DouglasA 20:23, 24 October 2009 (EDT)

Favorite Music?

Dear Mr. Schafly,

I was wondering, what kind of music do you enjoy? What are some of your favorite bands or genres of music? I'm always curious as to what type of music people like, and so I figured I'd just go out and ask, if that is ok with you? If you do not feel like answering, that is ok, I am just very interested in this kind of stuff. Thanks! Pnino 23:03, 26 October 2009 (EDT)

Most of my favorites are on this list: Essay:Greatest Conservative Songs. I've liked some liberal songs too, such as some of Sting's or R.E.M.'s stuff. Uh oh, I see we need an entry for Sting!--Andy Schlafly 23:29, 26 October 2009 (EDT)

Oh man, I'm a huge R.E.M. fan; what's your favorite album of theirs? I'm gonna have to go with Automatic for the People closely edging out Document. Pnino 14:45, 27 October 2009 (EDT)

Always glad to meet people who like R.E.M. I personally liked Around the Sun, good CD there (and sadly the only R.E.M one I have). RandolfH 00:37, 28 October 2009 (EDT)

Question:

I was editing the sleep article when I got to the section where it stated that sleep is derived from the German words "Schlaf" and Schlafen", which mean sleep. I checked it on a translator, and it did indeed translate to sleep. I was wondering if your heritage is perchance German. RandolfH 00:44, 28 October 2009 (EDT)

My last name is indeed Swiss German. It's a common name in certain towns in Switzerland.--Andy Schlafly 08:58, 28 October 2009 (EDT)

Explanation/apology

Mr Schlafly: I'm writing at the encouragement of Karajou, who kindly unblocked me after I explained and apologized for past behavior at Conservapedia, and I want to convey the same to you. I created new usernames after blocks several times, which I know violates protocol and I should not have done. But (except for one instance--see below) all the blocks were (in my opinion, at least) hasty and unjustified. One block was for blatantly moronic vandalism, which was actually committed by my young nephew under my username. That was careless on my part and will not happen again. Karajou found "the bulk of [my] editing [to be] professional and well-done" (quote from his email to me) and decided to give me a 2nd chance, and I hope you agree.

This username is my real first name and middle and last initials (first name, last initial was taken already). I have an advanced degree in English and have taught writing and literature in the past at the college and high school levels. I would like to contribute mainly through copyediting and by improving and creating articles on literary subjects. I'll steer clear of contetious issues. ChrisFV 17:57, 28 October 2009 (EDT)

Welcome back! Apology accepted. I look forward to learning from your edits.--Andy Schlafly 18:11, 28 October 2009 (EDT)

Thanks much! I will endeavor to make edits that are educational. ChrisFV 22:06, 28 October 2009 (EDT)

Math articles

Thanks for your changes to gradient and vector space! I don't mean to step on your toes by editing the same articles right after you -- I just saw your edits at Recent Changes and thought a bit more expansion would be helpful (those were articles I'd never looked at before). Feel free to revert my changes or make additional improvements! I think your emphasis on calculus on these pages will be valuable to students' understanding, and I hope I haven't diluted it too much. Best, --MarkGall 20:50, 31 October 2009 (EDT)

Mark, I appreciated your edits very much! I'll edit some more math pages later tonight. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly 21:29, 31 October 2009 (EDT)

Crazy thinking

Both views, that which exalts homosexuality as if it were the world's most noble calling, and that which mercilessly condemns homosexuals, are equally short-sighted. God loves everyone, and his rules for living should be followed for no other reason then the fact that His rules give us life and joy. --Ed Poor ^Talk 14:57, 1 November 2009 (EST)

That Comment

That comment is simply untrue. Most evolutionists I know (which is a large sample size) know the bible better than half the population

Pgmm, half of public schoolers probably cannot even read. Evolutionists never read the Bible once they latch onto the evolution belief system. Everyone knows that. If you're an evolutionist, then the odds are 100:1 against your spending any significant time reading the Bible.--Andy Schlafly 17:15, 2 November 2009 (EST)

Support for your claim that "half of public schoolers probably cannot even read?" And your statement that "Evolutionists never read the Bible once they latch onto the evolution belief system," in using extremes, proves false. It IS possible to remain a Christian while believing in evolution. I believe firmly in evolution, and yet I have read the Bible cover to cover. Avoge 18:20, 2 November 2009 (EST)

Reading the Skeptic's Annotated Bible website or any other "the Bible is full of errors and contradictions" website does not make an evolutionist more knowledgeable in the Bible than other people. Quite the opposite, in fact. Despite what they pretend to be, such websites are fueled by misconceptions, half-truths and outright lies and nothing else. I've never met an evolutionist who can accurately recite Christian beliefs. Just look at the paragons of evolutionists like Dawkins, Hitchens, Myers, etc. They are all completely ignorant and base every single one of their arguments against Christianity on straw men, and they are proud of their ignorance. Evolutionists are the epitome of Romans 1:20-23: "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles." In fact, the rest of that section thoroughly applies to evolutionists as well, but the whole part about exchanging the glory of God for images made to look like men and animals says "evolution" to me. Jinx McHue 18:48, 2 November 2009 (EST)

Avoge, you're not fooling anyone here. We all know evolutionists. My college and law school classes were filled with people who believed in evolution. Most professors (particularly the underachieving ones) believe in evolution. Virtually none of them read the Bible. You could ask a typical college professor the most basic question about the Bible and he'd be totally clueless. For example, how many of the Gospels are attributed to eyewitnesses? 99% of evolutionists would have no idea ... unless they learned it before they fell for the evolution belief system. If you read the Bible cover to cover, most likely it was before you became an evolutionist.--Andy Schlafly 18:56, 2 November 2009 (EST)

I am not trying to fool anyone. I'm saying that making a claim that "Evolutionists never read the Bible once they latch onto the evolution belief system" is being fairly closed minded, as, although I am not saying it is common, it is very possible for evolutionists to read the bible for knowledge, just as it is possible for creationists to read Darwin's theories for the exact same purpose. My point is, believing in evolution does not mean that a person has to abandon all forms of Christianity and its lessons, morals, and beliefs, many of which I believe have great merit. Avoge 13:20, 3 November 2009 (EST)

Avoge, you'd have a fine career with tobacco companies, by claiming that cigarette smoking doesn't cause lung cancer because there is one 95-year-old smoker. Look, it's an undeniable fact that once people fall for the evolution belief system, they never earnestly read the Bible with any regularity again. The cause-and-effect is even stronger than cigarettes causing lung cancer. Many evolutionists even brag about not reading the Bible. Are there 95-year-old smokers? Yes. Does that disprove the overwhelming correlation? Of course not.--Andy Schlafly 14:42, 3 November 2009 (EST)

Liberal traits

I was looking at Category:Liberal_Traits and the question of harassment came to mind. Liberals often harass people they disagree with. Do you think that's covered by one of the already listed traits, or would it be something new to be added? Jinx McHue 00:29, 3 November 2009 (EST)

Please add it. There was just an example of this with the gay marriage crowd causing the firing of a Christian from a Brookstone retail store in Massachusetts.--Andy Schlafly 09:41, 3 November 2009 (EST)

Fort Hood Request

Andy,

I realize it's not precisely news, but is there any way we could have a message of condolences and prayers for the families of those killed at Fort Hood on the main page? They need all the prayerful support they can get right now. --Benp 19:43, 6 November 2009 (EST)

I second that. -- Jeffrey W. Lauttamus_Discussion 19:44, 6 November 2009 (EST)

Me too, honestly. --Joaquín Martínez 19:47, 6 November 2009 (EST)

I'm all for prayer, and will say one myself. We don't typically put prayer messages on the Main Page, but it's fine to consider one. How about something like "We pray for the victims of the Fort Hood massacre and we pray that America takes steps to prevent this type of attack from happening again." Other suggestions are welcome--Andy Schlafly 19:57, 6 November 2009 (EST)

I think that would be a fine sentiment. I realize it's not typical, but then again, there's nothing typical about this situation. Let's all pray that it stays that way. --Benp 20:12, 6 November 2009 (EST)

Didn't we do something similar for the Virginia Tech Massacre? I could have sworn we did. The statement above seems good. -- Jeffrey W. Lauttamus_Discussion 20:17, 6 November 2009 (EST)

Thank you, Andy! --Benp 20:36, 6 November 2009 (EST)

Two usernames on the same IP

Well, after inquiring as to what I've been doing for the past few days, my wife is actually interested in creating an account. She's a journalist and said that it would be "fun to edit stuff and keep me in practice." I just wanted to give you a heads up that her name (probably something along the lines of BriannaL, BriLauttamus, etc.) and mine will be editing from the same IP address. I hope that this doesn't cause any issues. Thanks, Andy! -- Jeffrey W. Lauttamus_Discussion 12:26, 7 November 2009 (EST)

Jeffrey, that's great! A most hearty welcome to your wife! It's no problem for you to have multiple accounts with your IP and I can't imagine anyone blocking your account after your many fine contributions here. Thanks and Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly 12:36, 7 November 2009 (EST)