1 posted on
10/12/2005 2:13:27 PM PDT by
nerdgirl
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
To: nerdgirl
That site has been DUmmied down.
To: nerdgirl
It partly reads as if it was written by a disgruntled ex-Freeper who was banned.
3 posted on
10/12/2005 2:18:02 PM PDT by
Riley
("Bother" said Pooh, as he fired the Claymores.)
To: nerdgirl
Sorry but I can't post the URL to Wikipedia hereWhy not?
To: nerdgirl
Hmm, i thought for the most part it was okay. I think i know the "one part" would it be the piece with the "3" hyper-link at the end of it?
That guy probably got booted cause he's an idiot, not cause of the remarks about GW. Heck I've made a few remarks expressing some disappointment with him. Still here, or at least I think I'm logged in :)
10 posted on
10/12/2005 2:25:55 PM PDT by
tfecw
(It's for the children)
To: nerdgirl
Known as "freeping" a poll, the practice is not unique to the Free Republic forums and is employed by many other activist websites of all political stripes, such as Democratic Underground, where it is called "DU'ng". hee hee hee! He said dung.
12 posted on
10/12/2005 2:27:26 PM PDT by
LongElegantLegs
(also enjoy the occasional kick of a puppy.)
To: nerdgirl
The authors seem more positive in their entry for Democratic Undergound.
13 posted on
10/12/2005 2:27:49 PM PDT by
GSWarrior
(Obsessed with sects.)
To: nerdgirl
Not a flattering potrayal but not exactly dishonest either. I particularly enjoyed reading JimRob's initial opposition to Bush.
Keyes was a far superior choice just as J. Brown is superior to Miers.
14 posted on
10/12/2005 2:30:38 PM PDT by
AdamSelene235
(Truth has become so rare and precious she is always attended to by a bodyguard of lies.)
To: nerdgirl
This comes up every couple of weeks now. To be fair, Wikipedia is open to everyone for editing. Any complaints that it isn't fair or balanced really aren't valid 'cause you can go over there and fix it in just about as much time as it takes to write and complain.
Make sure that you're looking at the actual article page too, and not the "Talk" section.
To: nerdgirl
They have a link to DUmmie Funnies!
27 posted on
10/12/2005 3:26:08 PM PDT by
bk1000
(A clear conscience is a sure sign of a poor memory)
To: nerdgirl
The stuff isn't just coming from the DUers but also the losers from Liberty Post, FU, etc.
28 posted on
10/12/2005 3:29:12 PM PDT by
COEXERJ145
(Cindy Sheehan, Pat Buchanan, John Conyers, and David Duke Are Just Different Sides of the Same Coin.)
To: nerdgirl
Wikipedia is moderated in large part by 17 year-old Eurotrash leftists, FYI.
29 posted on
10/12/2005 3:39:03 PM PDT by
veronica
("clowns clones clowns/ it's raining clowns/snarling FR obsessed clones/ claws bared clowns"...)
To: nerdgirl
Three main groups can be observed on the forum: neoconservatives, paleoconservatives, and libertarians/paleolibertarians
I can't find my place in any of the groups mentioned. Help me!!!
skepticism and fear of United Nations/European Union
Geesh. I'm quaking in my boots with fear.
"DUNG"

40 posted on
10/12/2005 5:27:52 PM PDT by
gpapa
(Boost FR Traffic! Make FR your home page!)
To: nerdgirl
Who the heck is Jim Robertson?
44 posted on
10/12/2005 5:52:53 PM PDT by
July 4th
(A vacant lot cancelled out my vote for Bush.)
To: nerdgirl
I like this paragraph: Alexa, a company that ranks the Internet's 100,000 most visited sites, and measures their traffic in users per million, estimates that Free Republic reaches approximately five to six hundred users per million each day, and ranks at number 1,560 of all sites. Comparitively, by Alexa Internet's estimation, Wikipedia.org reaches 11 to 12 thousand per million each day and ranks at 53, Yahoo reaches 300,000 and ranks at no. 1, and Google reaches 220,000 and ranks at no. 3. Visits at Free Republic tend to spike sharply upward during election seasons and when news breaks which captures its users' interest. Note, however, that Alexa rankings are not reliable as a means of assessing actual traffic to a site. Shouldn't we be compared to our "countersite" DU? I bet that traffic comparison would tell you a whole lot more.
To: nerdgirl
Wikipedia is hijacked by liberals. What did you expect? They justify their views as neutral point of views claiming it as the way of Wikipedian but the truth is that their liberal views are neutral point of views in their term while the reality it is totally biased. When anything is against their liberal views, they edit it and will say that they are Wikipedians and the editing does not respect the Wikipedian community. What is to be done? There should be more Conservative moderators to get in, and over number the Liberal moderators, by Conservatives promoting other Conservatives to be moderators. Next, let the Conservative moderators push the Conservative's NPOV and any revert war to end with the liberals kicked out.
55 posted on
10/12/2005 9:20:50 PM PDT by
Wiz
To: nerdgirl
69 posted on
10/13/2005 8:10:00 AM PDT by
Salvation
(†With God all things are possible.†)
To: nerdgirl
I read the Wikipedia article sometime ago. The authors of the article did not make any accusations against FR. Instead, they reported accusations made by others against FR. There have in fact been people who have made such accusations against FR. The article merely reported that others had made those accusations. It did not say whether those accusations were true or false.
To: nerdgirl; All
Snopes.com, known for it's high level of accuracy, is biased towards the Left as well.
There's nothing damaging in this small list on Bill Clinton, a President who was impeached. http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/clintons.asp
Yet, there's a mile long list of bashing on Bush http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/bush.asp
And equally defends Kerry.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/kerry.asp
To: nerdgirl
Reads like Democrat party opposition research.
76 posted on
10/13/2005 8:38:34 PM PDT by
dr_who_2
To: nerdgirl
Given the state of our nation's sovereign borders, the out-of-control feral spending, his resurrection of the impeached, convicted, fined, dis-barred and disgraced co-serial-rapist Cli'toons, his recent supreme court nominee, PC pussy-footing around in Iraq, women in combat situations in the military and a list of other failings becoming too long to track, I find myself [That's funny, didn't know Iwas lost!] most fondly reflecting on these sentiments: [Which, despite that unlike his predesessor, the current feller's not a felon, I then shared!]
QUOTE:
It is also worth noting that Jim Robinson, who is often less than tolerant of users who speak disparagingly of the current administration, said of George W. Bush on August 20, 1999:
"Well, by God, if you people insist on electing another cokehead as President, you damned well better throw open all the prison cell doors and free every man, woman, and child you're holding on drug charges. And if you're gonna elect another drug felon as President, you'd better rescind each and every one of your unconstitutional drug laws now on the books, including all of your unconstitutional search and seizure laws, and your asset forfeiture laws, and your laws that enable your unconstitutional snooping into our bank accounts and cash transactions. Well, I don't know whether to laugh or cry. You people are sick! Conservatives my ass. You people are nothing but a bunch of non-thinking hypocrits! You're a shame and a disgrace to the Republic!"
END QUOTE.
78 posted on
10/14/2005 8:02:20 AM PDT by
Brian Allen
(Patriotic [Immigrant] AMERICAN-American by choice - Christian by Grace)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson