View Poll Results: How well does it mesh with your world view?

Voters
53. You may not vote on this poll
  • I am conservative and I think it is very valid to my world view

    3 5.66%
  • I am a conservative and I think its somewhat valid to my world view

    2 3.77%
  • I am a conservative and it is not at all valid to my world view

    7 13.21%
  • I am a liberal and I think it is very valid to my world view

    1 1.89%
  • I am a liberal and I think it is somewhat valid to my world view

    0 0%
  • I am a liberal and it is not at all valid to my world view

    16 30.19%
  • I am a libertarian/other and it is very valid to my world view

    0 0%
  • I am a libertarian/other and it is somewhat valid to my world view

    4 7.55%
  • I am a libertarian/other and it is not at all valid to my world view

    11 20.75%
  • Other (in a post)

    9 16.98%
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 78

Thread: Conservopedia

  1. #31
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Conservopedia

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    Just a quick poll on what people think. It is anonymous.
    I find it as relevant as I do Encyclopedia Dramatica.

    Notice: Encyclopedia Dramatica is not safe for work, children, people with heart conditions etc.
    You have been warned.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  2. #32
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Conservopedia

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Man View Post
    Why would it not be valid to anyone's world view?
    Personally, i think much of it is edited by people trying to make conservatives look bad. If it's all made up, it wouldn't really be valid to anyone's wordlview.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  3. #33
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,754

    Re: Conservopedia

    Other: What is it?

    But after reading the thread, I know, at least obliquely.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  4. #34
    Sage
    soccerboy22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    A warm place
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 10:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    10,723

    Re: Conservopedia

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Personally, i think much of it is edited by people trying to make conservatives look bad. If it's all made up, it wouldn't really be valid to anyone's wordlview.
    I agree that some of it made be edited to make the site look stupid. But also I remember reading some articles like the Bible Project and they are the same. So, sadly I don't know if we will ever know how much of it is what the original author wrote.

  5. #35

  6. #36
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,990

    Re: Conservopedia

    I'm an independent, and I think the writers of conservapedia are arrogant and disrespectful towards liberals. Almost all of their site updates and news updates are about bashing liberals and Obama. It would be nicer and more respectable if they were to build up the conservative world view with facts instead of bashing liberals and Obama. However, much of what I find on the site is pretty valid.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  7. #37
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Conservopedia

    Some background.

    Conservapedia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Conservapedia was created in November 2006 by Andrew Schlafly, a Harvard-educated attorney and a homeschool teacher.[4] He felt the need to start the project after reading a student's assignment written using Common Era dating notation rather than the Anno Domini system that he preferred.[12] Although he was "an early Wikipedia enthusiast", as reported by Shawn Zeller of Congressional Quarterly, Schlafly became concerned about bias after Wikipedia editors repeatedly reverted his edits to the article about the 2005 Kansas evolution hearings.[13] Schlafly expressed hope that Conservapedia would become a general resource for American educators and a counterpoint to the liberal bias that he perceived in Wikipedia.[5][7][14]

    The "Eagle Forum University" online education program, which is associated with Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Forum organization, uses material for various online courses, including U.S. history, stored on Conservapedia.[6][15][16] Editing of Conservapedia articles related to a particular course topic is also a certain assignment for Eagle Forum University students.[16]

    Running on MediaWiki software,[3][6] the site was founded in 2006, with its earliest articles dating from November 22.[5][6][14] As of October 2009, Conservapedia contains over 32,316 pages, not counting pages intended for internal discussion and collaboration, minimal "stub" articles, and other miscellany.[17] Regular features on the front page of Conservapedia include links to news articles and blogs that the site's editors consider relevant to conservatism.[18] The site also hosts debates in which its users may participate; subjects discussed include religion and politics.[19] Editors of Conservapedia also maintain a page titled "Examples of Bias in Wikipedia" that compiles alleged instances of bias or errors on Wikipedia pages.[7][20] It was, at one point, the most-viewed page on the site.[21]

    Conservapedia has unique editorial policies designed to prevent what Schlafly sees as structural and ideological problems with Wikipedia and generalized vandalism.
    [edit] Differences from Wikipedia

    Many editorial practices of Conservapedia differ from those of Wikipedia. Articles and other content on the site frequently include criticism of Wikipedia as well as criticism of its alleged liberal ideology.[7] Launching the online encyclopedia project, Schlafly asserted the need for an alternative to Wikipedia due to editorial philosophy conflicts. The site's "Conservapedia Commandments"[22] differ from Wikipedia's editorial policies, which include following a neutral point of view[23] and avoiding original research.[24][25] In response to Wikipedia's core policy of neutrality, Schlafly has stated: "It's impossible for an encyclopedia to be neutral. I mean let's take a point of view, let's disclose that point of view to the reader",[5] and "Wikipedia does not poll the views of its editors and administrators. They make no effort to retain balance. It ends up having all the neutrality of a lynch mob".[26]

    In a March 2007 interview with The Guardian, Schlafly stated, "I've tried editing Wikipedia, and found it and the biased editors who dominate it censor or change facts to suit their views. In one case my factual edits were removed within 60 seconds—so editing Wikipedia is no longer a viable approach".[14] On March 7, 2007 Schlafly was interviewed on BBC Radio 4's flagship morning show, Today, opposite Wikipedia administrator Jim Redmond. Schlafly raised several concerns: that the article on the Renaissance does not give any credit to Christianity, that Wikipedia articles apparently prefer to use non-American spellings even though most users are American, that the article on American activities in the Philippines has a distinctly anti-American bias, and that attempts to include pro-Christian or pro-American views are removed very quickly. In response to Schlafly's claim that the Wikipedia policy of allowing both Common Era and Anno Domini notation was anti-Christian bias,[27][28][29] Redmond argued that Wikipedia attracts contributors worldwide and so must use Common Era notation to be more neutral, since CE notation has only a nominal, not numerical, difference with the AD format. He also cited the Wikipedia policies regarding citation of sources and cooperation with other contributors as basis for allowing any factual information to be added.[30]
    Last edited by tacomancer; 06-22-10 at 07:51 PM.

  8. #38
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:27 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,361
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Conservopedia

    What is the term for right wing ideology that is indistinguishable from satire?
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  9. #39
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,802

    Re: Conservopedia

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    I'm an independent, and I think the writers of conservapedia are arrogant and disrespectful towards liberals. Almost all of their site updates and news updates are about bashing liberals and Obama. It would be nicer and more respectable if they were to build up the conservative world view with facts instead of bashing liberals and Obama. However, much of what I find on the site is pretty valid.
    In today's world, it is far more likely that you will hear someone bashing another's position then to dare to present their own. Few care for solutions. They just care how to attack the other guy. The entire political process is filled with cowards.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  10. #40
    Dungeon Master
    Veni, vidi, dormivi!

    spud_meister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Didjabringabeeralong
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    33,894
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Conservopedia

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    What is the term for right wing ideology that is indistinguishable from satire?
    US Republican?
    So follow me into the desert
    As desperate as you are
    Where the moon is glued to a picture of heaven
    And all the little pigs have God

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •