User talk:DMorris

/Archive 1

Infinite blocks

Hello,
I noticed you recently extended a couple blocks to infinite. I have no problem with your intentions--clearly those accounts will never be used for good purposes. However, there is one issue--not only are the user accounts blocked, but the IP addresses used by them are also blocked. IP addresses have the habit of getting reassigned to different people eventually (some people get new IPs every 6 months or less), so it is not really healthy to have them blocked forever. Thus the issue: Block only the account forever, allowing the same troll to register more accounts from the same IP, or block the IP and account for a limited time, so the troll is stopped from reusing the same address.
I don't know for sure what is best, but please try to do only one or the other. My preference is to do a timed block on the IP and account, but it's not ideal. Andy has bee reducing user/IP blocks to 6 months lately, when he sees them. --David B ^(TALK) 20:31, 8 January 2019 (EST)

Autoblocks on the IPs only last for 24 hours regardless of how long the account is blocked for. If the autoblocks lasted as long as the block on the account, no wi-fi hotspot in all of Port Charlotte would be able to edit that one wiki whose name starts with an "R," nor would half of my wireless carrier's /16 range. DMorris (talk) 20:42, 8 January 2019 (EST)

Yes, autoblock entries listed in the block log only last 24 hours. Yet, I have tried connecting in months later from proxies which have been used used by vandals, and autoblock kicks in and issues another 24 hour block for some reason.

I finally went and read up on it, and learned something. In short, it looks like you are right (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Autoblock). However, I have seen autoblock triggered again at a later time, so I'll need to do some experimentation. Thanks for straightening me out--I'll go try to learn why it sometimes seems to persist afterwards. --David B ^(TALK) 20:51, 8 January 2019 (EST)

The autoblock kicks in if the same user logs in again and tries to edit, I think, but it doesn't matter what IP it is, any IP they try to edit from gets autoblocked. There's nothing really we can do if someone tries to abuse that, but it would be petty because the block would only last 24 hours at a time anyway. Save for the time I left my account on Wikipedia logged in on a public computer like an amateur, the only wiki I've ever been blocked on is that one that starts with an "R" (and I have seen their block message plenty of times), so... DMorris (talk) 10:05, 9 January 2019 (EST)

Interesting.... that would make sense. I have been playing around a little and been unable to reproduce the issue, but your explanation makes sense. 24 hours just wouldn't be worth trying to abuse, so yes, I wouldn't worry about that. Thanks for straightening me out! --David B ^(TALK) 23:08, 9 January 2019 (EST)

Gideons

Would you at least provide a source that I can read for this edit? This requirement is new to me (I'm not a member, but still). --1990'sguy (talk) 21:32, 12 February 2019 (EST)

Sure, it's in the front few pages of every Gideon bible, and it's also on the application which I believe is available on gideons.org. You can see that i am a member because I am wearing the name tag in the picture on my user page (the lady is not a member... at least not yet) I am editing from my phone right now, but I'm going to fire up the laptop and put the reference in the article. The men have to be 21 or older and either be business leaders (managing a McDonalds classifies as being a business leader though), some flavor of professional (I am an actively licensed real estate professional, which is how I qualify), or someone retired from such a profession. The ladies, known as "auxillaries" just have to be married to a Gideon and be a church member with a profession of faith. DMorris (talk) 21:42, 12 February 2019 (EST)

OK, thanks for explaining it to me. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:49, 12 February 2019 (EST)

Opps

Sorry about that block. It shouldn't happen again. --David B ^(TALK) 23:25, 18 February 2019 (EST)

Re: Sissy punk site

Can do - that site's basically a joke anyway. Northwest (talk) 22:52, 24 March 2019 (EDT)

Infowars

You have a typo on the Infowars article. I can't tell what you meant. VargasMilan (talk) Sunday, 18:02, 7 July 2019 (EDT)

Oops. Thanks for pointing that out. DMorris (talk) 21:02, 7 July 2019 (EDT)

Hey there.

Hi Dmorris.

I wanted to know who 24.146.248.0/21 is. --Donald Yeschayi (talk) 09:28, 25 January 2021 (EST)

I don't discuss CheckUser data with non-CheckUsers, but I will say it is a person who has been engaging in fairly serious harassment for several years now. DMorris (talk) 09:40, 25 January 2021 (EST)

Am I a bad editor?

I think I am. --Yeschayi (talk) 10:00, 25 January 2021 (EST)

Why would you think that? DMorris (talk) 10:05, 25 January 2021 (EST)

I don't know. Just think I am. --Yeschayi (talk) 10:08, 25 January 2021 (EST)

That's demons telling you that (to understand where I am coming from with that, I am an Independent Baptist). If you think your edits are bad, have a look at some of my earliest edits to a wiki. So cheesy. I was a teenager learning how Wikipedia works. DMorris (talk) 10:11, 25 January 2021 (EST)

Proposal

We would appreciate your input at Conservapedia:Community_Portal#Proposal. Thanks. RobS^{Free Kyle!} 19:59, 1 February 2021 (EST)

As a newbie to Conservapedia, there are references that I do not know. What is the "Ratdiculous" "Rat-Tard nest"? -- --CharlesShirley (talk) 18:00, 4 February 2021 (EST)

Quick note

I moved the material in my mailbox to the area where we had the original debate. I am telling you this because I wish to be cordial and not give you the false impression that I deleted it out of my mailbox. I merely moved it. Conservative (talk) 22:15, September 16, 2023 (EDT)

It's off topic there, that's why I moved the discussion to your talk page. That discussion has nothing to do with the issue at hand on the original page. DMorris (talk) 22:18, September 16, 2023 (EDT)

Can you email me. I have a small favor to ask of you. Send an email to conservativeconservapediaATgmailDOTcom Thanks. Conservative (talk) 22:20, September 16, 2023 (EDT)

I'm getting ready to go to bed but I can email you tomorrow afternoon. DMorris (talk) 22:22, September 16, 2023 (EDT)

Fine. Conservative (talk) 22:33, September 16, 2023 (EDT)

DMorris, nevermind emailing me tomorrow. I will just handle the issue through Andy. I don't want to spend a lot of time on the matter as I am working on a project right now. Conservative (talk) 00:02, September 17, 2023 (EDT)

Theological debates

Hi DMorris, I created debate pages a while ago like Debate: Is annihilationism biblical. Please join if you're interested, as I'm more than eager to discuss biblical doctrine. I recently came to an interesting conclusion: the moral aspect of the Mosaic law is still binding after all. If you happen to differ, I'm more than happy to share my thoughts and hear your input on the matter. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 22:26, September 16, 2023 (EDT)

I don't think that we should still be enforcing all aspects of Mosaic law, but there's certainly some examples we could take from it. I'm sleepy, it's 10:30 here and I'm used to having to get up at 4:00 AM during the week. DMorris (talk) 22:28, September 16, 2023 (EDT)

Wow, what a sleep schedule. Alright then, I'll create a debate page explaining my reasoning on the matter soon and link it here. My argument rests on a precise comprehension of the Epistle to the Hebrews and its implications on the law. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 22:30, September 16, 2023 (EDT)

Update: debate page created, with my main points highlighted: Debate: Is the Mosaic law still binding. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Monday, 09:09, September 18, 2023 (EDT)

Please check your email (a notice here just in case, since you didn't reply to my more prior email)...

...the one with "friends" in the address title. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Sunday, 23:24, September 16, 2023 (EDT)

Faith/works issue

I am looking into the faith/works issue more. I think I may have to understand the Greek better, do more Bible exegesis, etc. There does seem to be a tension between James 2:24 and Ephesians 2:8-9. I think a better understanding is possible. But in a proverbial sense, some nuts are harder to crack than others. Conservative (talk) 21:44, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

No, Conservative, there is no contradiction at all. Salvation and justification are two different things: we are saved by faith and faith alone, and justified by the completion of our faith through the works of the Spirit. —LT ^{Rev. 22:13} Wednesday, 21:48, September 19, 2023 (EDT)

Ephesians 2:8 tells us that we are saved by grace and not of our own works. The simple minded folks of the world think this contradicts James 2:26, but it really does not, because one who is truly saved should have works reflecting their salvation. The works are a symptom of salvation, not a cause of it. DMorris (talk) 18:21, March 23, 2024 (EDT)

RobSmith is trying to turn Conservapedia into a gaggle of girly gossip. Real men do not gossip. High school girls gossip

As you can see HERE, User: RobSmith is trying to turn Conservapedia into a gaggle of girly gossip. Real men do not gossip. High school girls gossip.

The Conservapedia page Conservapedia:How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia clearly says "We do not allow gossip, just as a real encyclopedia avoids it."

If you could please let the owner of the website, that you do not appreciate RobSmith's efforts to turn Conservapedia into a place of gossip, I would appreciate it. Thank you. Conservative (talk) 10:11, March 21, 2024 (EDT

Right now, Conservapedians are writing to the owner of the website complaining about the belligerence of User: RobSmith towards other Conservapedians.

Previously, RobSmith was stripped of his adminship and banned from the website due to his bad behavior. And he is currently in some hot water now.

Please write to Andy Schlafly, who is the owner of the website at his email address which you have. And please CC me on the email at conservativeconservapediaATgmailDOTcom

Thank you. Conservative (talk) 11:54, March 21, 2024 (EDT)

I work with high school girls (along with high school boys, middle schoolers, and elementary schoolers). Comparing the actions described to the actions of high school girls is an insult to high school girls. ;) (this is sarcasm in action). DMorris (talk) 18:04, March 23, 2024 (EDT)

Please check your email.

Please check your email and respond to it. It is important. You will soon see why. Conservative (talk) 15:08, March 24, 2024 (EDT)

Okay. DMorris (talk) 16:19, March 24, 2024 (EDT)