![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
And if I've been "ignoring" your posts, it's likely because I've been really busy lately, and quite tired. I apologize. Please point me to anything you with me to address. I've recently stopped being so busy (and tired). I think maybe you misread my post. I'm not suggesting this wiki represents the mindset of the traditional conservative; I'm saying I think of them when I see things like this...as a way of figuring out how conservatism is balanced within itself. Anyway, I won't speculate further on what upset you; perhaps you can just come out and tell me and we can figure this out. |
It is quite possible to respect individuals while condemning the general group, jorge. I feel the same way about conservatives, especially the religious right. I do respect your views here because you present them intelligently and respectfully. If you browse through Conservapedia, you will note that not only are most of the views logically flawed but they certainly are presented with nothing but a thin veneer of respect.
|
jorgelito, you may be highlighting a semantic logjam in communication.
Liberal, socially, typically means someone who is open and free, unrestricted. It is logically uncharacteristic of this mentality to classify or convert others to its side. All this side asks for is the freedom to do what it wants. Conservative, socially, typically means someone who is strictly conforming to a standard with boundaries. Boundaries do not work if nobody adheres to them, so this side typically seeks to enforce the same boundaries on others around them. |
Sigh. I live in the midst of Conservative America, so I hear stuff like this all the time. It makes me sad.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
My conservative friends aren't exactly happy that I am leaning Obama but they respect me enough not to give me shit for it. It's just my liberal friends who are so fanatical. P.S. - Never surf TFP while drunk. The more you know... |
Quote:
Quote:
That made me giggle. |
Quote:
Quote:
As far as I'm concerned, the website is a joke and I hope that anyone with a rational mind thinks the same way. I actually kind of want to meet someone like this...I think telling them about myself would cause them to have a breakdown or at the very least, they'd be as weirded out by me as I am by them. Things like this make me happy I live in a very socially liberal town. The only real problem I have with conservapedia (other than they're complete disregard for facts or rationality) is that I know that some kids are growing up in homes with this biased environment and they probably view websites like that as fact. Those kids must grow up into some messed up adults. I'd like to point out also, that I think that wikipedia tends to be more liberal because it's the internet age group that's logging on and adding to it the most and we seem to be more liberal. |
Ironically, jorgelito, it's the exact opposite situation with me.
Except that my present company includes very few conservatives, but those it does include :x. I agree with your statement that -both- sides do it. |
I think the discussions in this thread are a clear indication that, thanks to spin, there has been a lot of misunderstanding around the definition of political positions. The conservative spin on the word liberal has been such that the definition of liberal has been completely reversed.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
After all, if there is a bias, you are free to change it... |
@Knife: Not necessarily. Hot topics like abortion and such are pretty well locked down. You can apply to add your FACTS/ETC. to the debate, but they won't allow people to edit it at all if they're just going to blank the page and say ABORTIONZ RONG!
Thus, the possibility for bias emerges because the administrators decide whether something is worthy of inclusion to their page, and they can have a liberal bias (not too pronounced or it would be noticed/the more moderates would object). I read the Conservapedia article on their riot list against Wikipedia, and they do have a very, very minor point with a lot of the things. Certainly not enough to reject the colossal amount of information Wikipedia has, however. |
Quote:
Quote:
We can even put this to the test. As I suggested earlier, find a specific point of bias. We can change it and see how long it takes for that change to be reverted. If your change is sufficiently neutral, I'm pretty sure it won't get reverted... Quote:
-----Added 29/9/2008 at 06 : 04 : 42----- Quote:
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:46 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project