User talk:Falphin/Archive 2/23May-18June

Well done
Well done for your contibutions on Culture of Afghanistan, I'm amazed that it took only two hours from start to well written page. Keep up the good work! T.A Stevenson 17:47, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
 * If you're interested, I'd love it if you could take a look at Afghan people, which has been listed for deletion and is a pathetic article. You could model it after English (people). Thanks. --Dmcdevit 21:30, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Janowski Variation
Hi Falphin! I have merged this article with the Old Indian Defense, I have a feeling that almost any chess opening article which has a title ending with "Variation" should be merged and that stubby Old Indian article looked very lonely... I also removed the external link on the Janowski, it seemed to be a bookstore's entry about a book and in general Wikipedia discourages commercial links. I understand your inclusion of that link however, I have looked for a good external link for the Old Indian, but so far I haven't had much luck. Sjakkalle 08:01, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Afghan People
I saw what you've done to that article, and you're right. It's completely different now. The content is now valid, so it doesn't need to be deleted anymore. I've changed my vote on the VFD page, so you can take a look there to see my opinion. Anyway, nice job on that. Hope people will understand. And thank you for your message.--Kaonashi 02:51, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

You did a great job on this article, it is a shame things are sent to VfD before being given a chance to be cleaned up. - Regards--AYArktos 00:44, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Re:serfdom
Tnx :) I'd like to make this a FA eventually, but this sill needs a major expantion and some pics. Feel free to offer any suggestios or contribute :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 09:43, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Pandeism
I'm back a day early, but today is all about unpacking and cleaning up, so not much wiki-time. I'll address Progressivepantheist's concerns tomorrow. -- BD2412 talk 15:50, 2005 May 29 (UTC)

COTW Project
You voted for Roaring Twenties, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.-- Falphin 12:34, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes sure, I will try to do whatever I am able to do. Thanks.--Bhadani 12:45, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your kind words, and vote in support of my admin nomination. Paul August &#9742; 17:09, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

Votes for deletion/Church of Reality
You should note that, as VfDs aren't votes in the sense of counting up the votes for and against, but attempts to gain consensus, your vote might not count (or might not be given much weight) if you don't give a reason for it, and/or against the arguments on the other side. Mel Etitis ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 19:48, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Great. I don't agree with you, of course, but I think that it makes the process better if everyone gets involved in the discussion. Mel Etitis  ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 20:11, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

express mail
I think the entry for the trademarked term should be placed into express mail (USPS)

lots of issues | leave me a message 20:12, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Excellent job.

lots of issues | leave me a message 20:31, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Votes for deletion/List of tyrants
Please read what I have written on the page, because I hope that on reflection you will change your vote. Philip Baird Shearer 17:43, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Matt Slick Criticism
Yes, I will help, but we should continue on that talk page and request the aid of Hyperbole. Mdavidn 20:04, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * See my proposed suggestion and answer on talk there. Falphin 20:14, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC).


 * FYI, I'll be away until this evening. Mdavidn 21:00, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm keeping an eye on the page, and doing everything I can to keep the criticism section as factual and objective as possible. Was there anything else specific that you wanted to ask me to do? --Hyperbole 21:48, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Okay, I found the work-in-progress page and put some content there. I have two thoughts: 1) I think the criticisms I wrote originally, which have been transplanted to CARM, are far more relevant in the Slick page than the CARM page, since they are criticisms *of Matt Slick*; and 2) I feel the AARM link is highly relevant to the Slick page for purely encyclopedic reasons, since it is the only place on the Internet with a large quantity of unmoderated discussion about Slick.  In fact, taking the perspective of a completely disinterested scholar, I'd think AARM would be perhaps the most important link on that page, second only to CARM itself.  --Hyperbole 22:47, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This is on my own talk page, but I think it bears repeating here (but you can delete it if you want, after you read it - I really don't have a good understanding of the Wiki etiquette of talk pages yet) --Hyperbole 23:23, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC):


 * Oh also, the other person won't be back until later and then he will also work on the section. Falphin 23:01, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, most of that criticism isn't general at all. Slick's questionable tactics in debate and his poor treatment of those who don't share his beliefs are criticism of Slick, not of CARM. However, I did feel that the "supporters" section *was* more an endorsement of CARM than of Slick, and I tried to alter and cut it down to be otherwise. I don't think those particular criticisms are very appropriate on the CARM page; "debate tactics" is not a criticism of CARM. Critics of CARM itself are more likely to cite CARM's confusing, convoluted rules and a perception that the administration closes discussion boards for dishonest reasons. --Hyperbole 23:06, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

At this point I feel like the Slick page looks pretty good and I'm inclined to wait for Mdavidn's input before publishing it. --Hyperbole 23:24, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I pretty much agree Falphin 01:30, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Mdavidn hasn't dropped in, and I feel pretty good about the page. Would you like to update the Matt Slick page with it, and let it go public?  --Hyperbole 19:58, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Let me know if you're waiting for anything in particular; I doubt that Mdavidn would mind if we published it. Thanks --Hyperbole 05:29, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I think I'm going to go ahead and take it public; I don't think a social view section is really that necessary (since Slick is really known as a religious, not political, writer), and if anyone thinks it is, they can certainly write it. Let's see what people think...  --Hyperbole 18:54, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Okay, it looks to me like you might be working on it right now, so I'll let you keep doing that :) But I'd say, go ahead and publish it when you're done, or I can do it later today.  Thanks --Hyperbole 18:57, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi Mr. Falphin
I tried to find a way to send you this message privately, so I apologize if this is not the right place to state my case.

Diane S. on CARM is now calling me, HardyHeaven, [i]a disturbed person[/i], all the while claiming that I have lied and slandered her. Just for the record, allow me to tell you who I [i]really[/i] am. First off, I've been a Christian (Baptist) for over 30 years. I'm a full-time Realtor-Mom. My husband is a Sheriff officer who was recently awarded "Officer of the Year" for bravery in the line of duty. I am the recipient of Rotary International's "Service Above Self" award, for my work in AIDS education with youth.

Diane insists on nit-picking a date I mentioned (Aug. 04), which is actually the date that I found my way on to the CARM discussion boards. Coincidentally, I came to CARM immediately following an incident where a poster/moderator named "Carol" (whom Diane claims is NOT a moderator, yet Carol wears a white mod hat next to her name) slandered another poster named limana, on the private EVAN board. Word of Carol's gossip got out, and the atheists were inflamed ... as a result, most of the atheists left CARM out of protest, and formed the AARM board.

Shortly after this happened, Matt entered into a debate with a well-liked, polite atheist, Chad. There were polls which asked who won the debate, and when it became obvious that Chad had won, Matt, in essence, left the day-to-day operation of the boards in Diane's control. Yes, she has been an administrator there for many years, but she was given much more voice and power after Matt was disgraced in the debate.

One of Diane's little "fibs" is that atheists were logging in as different users, skewing the debate results. But the fact is, only a few people thought that Matt won ... a stat that incapable of being skewed. Matt shortly thereafter, removed the entire debate from the CARM site, promised to put it back up, then claimed he accidentaly deleted it.

Many negative comments were made by Diane about the honesty and integrity of the atheist population at CARM. Within the next month or so, the "conservative Christian" Diane mentioned, a poster named Coadie, made an untrue statement on ATH. Coadie is a Oneness Pentacostal who stated on the ATH board that all atheists are liars, as proven by a national lie detector study. When certain Christians stood up against this fallacy (as lying is not a characteristic of Christ), many of us were warned, suspended or banned.

After that, CARM closed the ATH board, regrouped a few days later, and called it a "private" board, then ultimately, several months later, opened it up again.

Meanwhile, I challenged Diane on one of her rules. Diane allowed a Christian poster to negatively rate several well-liked posters, and then turn his ratings off. When I challenged Diane for not applying the rules fairly, she pubically, on the boards, called me "childish", and suspended me. I asked that she remove a recent revelation I had made on EVAN about a sensitive illness that I have, and I was attacked by CARM's legal department. I apologized to CARM (for what, I don't know) but I asked NOT to be reinstated. Diane then posted a thread on Whine to another Christian poster (CeeCee) claiming that I had been BANNED.

Diane would like to make me out to be a bad, or [i]disturbed[/i] person, but that is not the case. I'm actually one of the kindest, warmest, most open-minded Christians that you'd ever want to meet. I'm active in my church, I donate large sums of money to community and civil projects on both the national and local levels, lead a small-group in my home, and, I'm generally, just another normal person who has been harmed by the "ministry" of CARM.

I have copies of nasty email messages from Diane, moderator and legal advisor Mmerth, as well as messages from Matt Slick himself in which he states that he appreciates my input as a Christian correction. Also, I have an original email from Matt in which he decreed that Coadie should be banned from CARM for making false statements about atheists, and the corresponding angry email from Diane in which she retracts Matt's decision, and instead supports and defends Coadie.

I'm a busy person, and I have neither the intention nor desire to publically fight any one person, or any particular ministry. However, when I find through personal experience that someone consistently violates their own rules, or lies or deletes relevent threads or debates in order to cover up their own misdeeds, I take exception. That being said, there's no need to ban me from Wiki, not that I have any intention of editing anything more here.

Between you and me, the side of the story Diane is telling on TOP this week is biased and borders on slander. If she continues to speak of me in this way, I will persue legal action against her. Diane seems to consider herself some kind of "god" who can make or break facts and truths to suit herself. That's her delusion, and it's all good and well, but I'd appreciate you hearing both sides of the story before you make a decision about who's "good" and who's "bad" in this world.

I'm one of the "good" guys. You have nothing to fear from me.

Sincerely, HardyHeaven

UK COTW: Welsh people
Hey, just to let you know that an article you voted for - Welsh people - has been chosen as the UK COTW. -- Cheers, Joolz 18:46, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * That's ok, the UK COTW is de-facto a fortnight long :P -- Joolz 18:52, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wallace
Photo added. I'm amazed to hear there is a browser extant that doesn't download images. Are you on a TRS-80 or what? :-) Hal Jespersen 20:52, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you Falphin
You will find that not all things on CARM are as they appear. It is sad, and now Diane is slandering me through the boards, and in pm's. I'm hurt and dismayed that anyone could read through hundreds of my posts, and assign anything other than a feeling of Christ-likeness to my words and behaviour.

Again, you'll have no trouble from me. Take care, and be blessed.

Ronda Hardy

COTW Project
You voted for High Middle Ages, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.

COTW removal...
I hope someone is looking at the history for Collaboration of the week/Removed... I haven't put all those little comments there for nothing... &#08492; astique &#09660; talk 00:07, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Oddly enough, I've never seen that page!  &#08492; astique &#09660; talk 03:00, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Pakistan
Would you like to join the animated discussion on the Pakistan's talk page? The current issue is whether "Pakistan is famous for its support of Taliban and 9/11 terrorist" is a suitable sentence to start the article's first paragraph. Your contribution would be much appreciated, as the current discussion seems to be more of a dialog between Ragib and SamTr014 (talk • contribs). Thanks !--PrinceA 06:18, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)