"Philip Rayment" <PJRaym...@yahoo.com.au>, Fri, 11 Apr 2008 22:36:54 +1000:
TK's actions have been a problem in several ways.
a.. He has always been very arrogant in responding to others
b.. He's frequently tried to make arrangements in private, including with Andy then citing Andy as justification for what he does.
c.. He tries to set one person against another, including sysops
And he's still doing it. I've documented some recent examples below.
So my question is, what is TK's supposed parole officer doing about any of this? Because if something isn't done soon, I'll take my own action against TK, and it's likely to end up as a permanent ban.
On both the Richard Dawkins talk page and the Liberal talk page, TK took further swipes at non-Americans. He's previously taken swipes at me, accusing me of being anti-American, and the last paragraph below also appears to be directed particularly at me (apart from other things, I have made comment about "U.S.-centric" attitudes a few times, although he was replying to Humblpi and perhaps Europeanunion. Even RationalWiki saw this as a "salvo against PJR". They were longish rants, so I'll only post excerpts here (italics and underlining his):
As this is an American Conservative/Christian encyclopedia above all else, foreign notions, the so-called "World View", internationalist approach isn't appropriate here.
It boils down to a clear disagreement between Internationalists (and they are primarily liberal) and those of us who support CP, which was founded as a U.S. Christian/Conservative - friendly encyclopedia, to continue to be true to that. While I wouldn't want to ignore the world as Internationalists see it, or wish it to be, that outlook is already embraced by Wikipedia, several thousand times larger than CP, so the POV is more than adequately served.
Some, mostly from other countries, while they might be Christians, certainly are not United States conservatives, and even they seek to impose their unique, anti (or contrary to)-U.S. point of view on CP, trying, bit by bit, to remove anything they consider "U.S.-centric". They are among those, like the liberals, who seek to fundamentally change the founding precepts of Conservapedia, and turn it towards the so-called "world view". While I don't seek to diminish what they believe (they cannot help it, being used to a "Wikipedian World" and not Americans) their role here, editors or admins alike, it seems to me, is either to get on board with CP's point of view, or at least stop the constant arguing that distracts from more content being made, and discouraging conservative editors from doing so. Since the actual practice of "conservatism" outside the United States, is fundamentally different, that puts CP automatically at odds with Europeans and others who might say they are "conservative" but in actual political practice their philosophy is closer to United States liberals.
TomMoore asked on the Main Page discussion page:
Maybe I missed the discussion on another page, but I notice that you're removing this category, Mr. Schlafly. I was curious as to why?
Which brought the following response from TK:
Conservapedia isn't a ''mobocracy'' and as long as I have been here, only since last March, policy decisions such as the category have never been a matter of editor vote, etc. So perhaps I misunderstand the original question?
On her talk page, Deborah expressed the following opinion:
Category:United States Mayors should obviously be a subcat of Category:Americans
To which TK responded as though he was in charge:
No, it shouldn't. Please stop.
On TK's talk page, Deborah asked a reasonable question:
Why should Americans not be put under the Category:Americans?
TK replied politely enough, but with the "leave it to us" attitude, and claiming special rights:
My previous decision on this, and to my knowledge Andy has not replaced me as the one to decide, was to label all things United States, with just that. So instead of Americans, we would use United States Citizens, etc. This is being discussed at this very moment.
I questioned where this decision was documented, but unfortunately didn't make clear that I was talking about TK's "previous decision", not the new one regarding Category:Americans. TK responded politely (although RationalWiki saw it as sarcasm) including offering to help further if he could. So I apologised for not being clear, and asked the question again.
TK's response was twofold. First, he deleted my post with the edit comment "Private sysop business is not discussed here, Period.". Second, he sent me a private e-mail titled "DO NOT POST TO MY PAGE AGAIN, EVER. UNLESS YOU ARE MAKING SOME ADMIN DEMAND OR DIRECTIVE." and with the content being "Are you completely clear?"