Talk:current status - Revision history

The Chort: /* McDonald's Part 2 */ Wow, I'm speaking like a sysop now!

The Chort — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 21:01:18 GMT

McDonald's Part 2: Wow, I'm speaking like a sysop now!

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:01, 17 September 2008
Line 69:		Line 69:
	:::::I put it back in the article after realizing it never seemed to come to a conclusion (although there ''were'' more declines than accepts), and that most people:<br> '''A.''' Seemed to just say "decline" instead of explaining, leading people to think they just did that because there was already a big stack o' declines.<br> '''B.''' Most people seemed to not get the point of why it was put on the article in the first place. It took like, 5 declines before somebody explained that there was a line in the sbemail that made it not completely random.<br> I think we should re-add it, or just get the consensus of the users now that the reason for the RWR is a lil' bit clearer. {{User:DevonM/sig}} 19:43, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		:::::I put it back in the article after realizing it never seemed to come to a conclusion (although there ''were'' more declines than accepts), and that most people:<br> '''A.''' Seemed to just say "decline" instead of explaining, leading people to think they just did that because there was already a big stack o' declines.<br> '''B.''' Most people seemed to not get the point of why it was put on the article in the first place. It took like, 5 declines before somebody explained that there was a line in the sbemail that made it not completely random.<br> I think we should re-add it, or just get the consensus of the users now that the reason for the RWR is a lil' bit clearer. {{User:DevonM/sig}} 19:43, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
	:::::::I agree with all the above. It's a valid reference to a popular fast-food chain and should be included. It doesn't matter how many people "get" a reference, it's for the people who don't. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 21:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		:::::::I agree with all the above. It's a valid reference to a popular fast-food chain and should be included. It doesn't matter how many people "get" a reference, it's for the people who don't. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 21:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
		+	::::::::One of the main functions of the Homestar Runner wiki is to list ''all'' of the Real-World References made by The Brothers Chaps in the Homestar Runner body of work, no matter how obvious each one is. Hence, we must be able to overturn the previous decision in order for us to achieve our mission. {{User:The Chort/sig}} 21:01, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Elcool: /* McDonald's Part 2 */ comment

Elcool — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:50:21 GMT

McDonald's Part 2: comment

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:50, 2 July 2008
Line 68:		Line 68:
	::::No, I don't know! How dare you assume that I do?! (Okay, so yeah, I know, but it was just an irresitable remark.) --{{User:Jay/sig}} 19:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		::::No, I don't know! How dare you assume that I do?! (Okay, so yeah, I know, but it was just an irresitable remark.) --{{User:Jay/sig}} 19:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
	:::::I put it back in the article after realizing it never seemed to come to a conclusion (although there ''were'' more declines than accepts), and that most people:<br> '''A.''' Seemed to just say "decline" instead of explaining, leading people to think they just did that because there was already a big stack o' declines.<br> '''B.''' Most people seemed to not get the point of why it was put on the article in the first place. It took like, 5 declines before somebody explained that there was a line in the sbemail that made it not completely random.<br> I think we should re-add it, or just get the consensus of the users now that the reason for the RWR is a lil' bit clearer. {{User:DevonM/sig}} 19:43, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		:::::I put it back in the article after realizing it never seemed to come to a conclusion (although there ''were'' more declines than accepts), and that most people:<br> '''A.''' Seemed to just say "decline" instead of explaining, leading people to think they just did that because there was already a big stack o' declines.<br> '''B.''' Most people seemed to not get the point of why it was put on the article in the first place. It took like, 5 declines before somebody explained that there was a line in the sbemail that made it not completely random.<br> I think we should re-add it, or just get the consensus of the users now that the reason for the RWR is a lil' bit clearer. {{User:DevonM/sig}} 19:43, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
		+	:::::::I agree with all the above. It's a valid reference to a popular fast-food chain and should be included. It doesn't matter how many people "get" a reference, it's for the people who don't. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 21:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

DevonM: /* McDonald's Part 2 */ explainin'

DevonM — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:43:33 GMT

McDonald's Part 2: explainin'

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:43, 2 July 2008
Line 67:		Line 67:
	:::It should be included. You should never assume that everyone knows something. You know what happens when you assume. --[[User:Acam30\|Acam30]] 18:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		:::It should be included. You should never assume that everyone knows something. You know what happens when you assume. --[[User:Acam30\|Acam30]] 18:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
	::::No, I don't know! How dare you assume that I do?! (Okay, so yeah, I know, but it was just an irresitable remark.) --{{User:Jay/sig}} 19:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		::::No, I don't know! How dare you assume that I do?! (Okay, so yeah, I know, but it was just an irresitable remark.) --{{User:Jay/sig}} 19:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
		+	:::::I put it back in the article after realizing it never seemed to come to a conclusion (although there ''were'' more declines than accepts), and that most people:<br> '''A.''' Seemed to just say "decline" instead of explaining, leading people to think they just did that because there was already a big stack o' declines.<br> '''B.''' Most people seemed to not get the point of why it was put on the article in the first place. It took like, 5 declines before somebody explained that there was a line in the sbemail that made it not completely random.<br> I think we should re-add it, or just get the consensus of the users now that the reason for the RWR is a lil' bit clearer. {{User:DevonM/sig}} 19:43, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Jay: /* McDonald's Part 2 */

Jay — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:31:56 GMT

McDonald's Part 2

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:31, 2 July 2008
Line 66:		Line 66:
	::It makes sense to me to include it. I only removed it as a matter of respect to the STUFF protocol. {{User:GreenHelmet/sig}} 18:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		::It makes sense to me to include it. I only removed it as a matter of respect to the STUFF protocol. {{User:GreenHelmet/sig}} 18:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
	:::It should be included. You should never assume that everyone knows something. You know what happens when you assume. --[[User:Acam30\|Acam30]] 18:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		:::It should be included. You should never assume that everyone knows something. You know what happens when you assume. --[[User:Acam30\|Acam30]] 18:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
		+	::::No, I don't know! How dare you assume that I do?! (Okay, so yeah, I know, but it was just an irresitable remark.) --{{User:Jay/sig}} 19:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Acam30: include.

Acam30 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 18:52:45 GMT

include.

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:52, 2 July 2008
Line 65:		Line 65:
	:I'd agree to including it now. You never know what someone else might not know. --[[User:DorianGray\|DorianGray]] 17:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		:I'd agree to including it now. You never know what someone else might not know. --[[User:DorianGray\|DorianGray]] 17:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
	::It makes sense to me to include it. I only removed it as a matter of respect to the STUFF protocol. {{User:GreenHelmet/sig}} 18:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		::It makes sense to me to include it. I only removed it as a matter of respect to the STUFF protocol. {{User:GreenHelmet/sig}} 18:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
		+	:::It should be included. You should never assume that everyone knows something. You know what happens when you assume. --[[User:Acam30\|Acam30]] 18:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

GreenHelmet: /* McDonald's Part 2 */ 2 cents

GreenHelmet — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 18:03:46 GMT

McDonald's Part 2: 2 cents

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:03, 2 July 2008
Line 64:		Line 64:
	This was recently added and removed again. The STUFF that was run on it was a long time ago, and i think we might get a different outcome if we were to STUFF it again now. It seems to me that, because the wiki is ever-evolving, a decision made at one time is only good so long as the community still agrees with it. I think this fact belongs, as it is a valid real-world reference, and people from other countries may not know of it. Besides, i've never liked the "too obvious" argument when it comes to real-world refs. Thoughts on seeing whether consensus has changed? {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 17:39, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		This was recently added and removed again. The STUFF that was run on it was a long time ago, and i think we might get a different outcome if we were to STUFF it again now. It seems to me that, because the wiki is ever-evolving, a decision made at one time is only good so long as the community still agrees with it. I think this fact belongs, as it is a valid real-world reference, and people from other countries may not know of it. Besides, i've never liked the "too obvious" argument when it comes to real-world refs. Thoughts on seeing whether consensus has changed? {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 17:39, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
	:I'd agree to including it now. You never know what someone else might not know. --[[User:DorianGray\|DorianGray]] 17:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		:I'd agree to including it now. You never know what someone else might not know. --[[User:DorianGray\|DorianGray]] 17:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
		+	::It makes sense to me to include it. I only removed it as a matter of respect to the STUFF protocol. {{User:GreenHelmet/sig}} 18:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

DorianGray: /* McDonald's Part 2 */ You mean this isn't included? I've been living my life as if it was.

DorianGray — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 17:56:27 GMT

McDonald's Part 2: You mean this isn't included? I've been living my life as if it was.

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:56, 2 July 2008
Line 63:		Line 63:
	*Coach Z mumbles the name of [[Wikipedia:Ronald McDonald\|Ronald McDonald]], who is the clown mascot of the [[Wikipedia:McDonald's\|McDonald's]] fast-food resturaunt chain.		*Coach Z mumbles the name of [[Wikipedia:Ronald McDonald\|Ronald McDonald]], who is the clown mascot of the [[Wikipedia:McDonald's\|McDonald's]] fast-food resturaunt chain.
	This was recently added and removed again. The STUFF that was run on it was a long time ago, and i think we might get a different outcome if we were to STUFF it again now. It seems to me that, because the wiki is ever-evolving, a decision made at one time is only good so long as the community still agrees with it. I think this fact belongs, as it is a valid real-world reference, and people from other countries may not know of it. Besides, i've never liked the "too obvious" argument when it comes to real-world refs. Thoughts on seeing whether consensus has changed? {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 17:39, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		This was recently added and removed again. The STUFF that was run on it was a long time ago, and i think we might get a different outcome if we were to STUFF it again now. It seems to me that, because the wiki is ever-evolving, a decision made at one time is only good so long as the community still agrees with it. I think this fact belongs, as it is a valid real-world reference, and people from other countries may not know of it. Besides, i've never liked the "too obvious" argument when it comes to real-world refs. Thoughts on seeing whether consensus has changed? {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 17:39, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
		+	:I'd agree to including it now. You never know what someone else might not know. --[[User:DorianGray\|DorianGray]] 17:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Defender1031: /**/McDonald's Part 2

Defender1031 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 17:39:11 GMT

: McDonald's Part 2

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:39, 2 July 2008
Line 58:		Line 58:
	::It does look a bit odd. I just like to think that it's because the back of Strong Bad's head looks the same whichever way it's turned. {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 15:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		::It does look a bit odd. I just like to think that it's because the back of Strong Bad's head looks the same whichever way it's turned. {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 15:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
	:::I just checked it. The only thing that moves is SB's mask. Although what kinda threw me off a little was the highlight on the right (a viewer's left) of his reflection's mask. When actually played, it ''does'' look a bit like his actual head moved, but that doesn't seem to be the case. {{User:DevonM/sig}} 16:55, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		:::I just checked it. The only thing that moves is SB's mask. Although what kinda threw me off a little was the highlight on the right (a viewer's left) of his reflection's mask. When actually played, it ''does'' look a bit like his actual head moved, but that doesn't seem to be the case. {{User:DevonM/sig}} 16:55, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
		+
		+	== McDonald's Part 2 ==
		+
		+	*Coach Z mumbles the name of [[Wikipedia:Ronald McDonald\|Ronald McDonald]], who is the clown mascot of the [[Wikipedia:McDonald's\|McDonald's]] fast-food resturaunt chain.
		+	This was recently added and removed again. The STUFF that was run on it was a long time ago, and i think we might get a different outcome if we were to STUFF it again now. It seems to me that, because the wiki is ever-evolving, a decision made at one time is only good so long as the community still agrees with it. I think this fact belongs, as it is a valid real-world reference, and people from other countries may not know of it. Besides, i've never liked the "too obvious" argument when it comes to real-world refs. Thoughts on seeing whether consensus has changed? {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 17:39, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

DevonM: /* His head doesn't move */

DevonM — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:55:46 GMT

His head doesn't move

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:55, 2 July 2008
Line 57:		Line 57:
	* No, his head really didn't move at all. I can't describe it any better... but his reflection didn't just turn its face, it actually moved the head in a way that would have had to be visible even without the face.--[[User:Cass from Germany\|Cass from Germany]] 14:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)-> after watching it again: Okay I have to correct myself, you might be right. Maybe it just looked like more than it was because he moves so quickly. But it still looks odd to me.		* No, his head really didn't move at all. I can't describe it any better... but his reflection didn't just turn its face, it actually moved the head in a way that would have had to be visible even without the face.--[[User:Cass from Germany\|Cass from Germany]] 14:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)-> after watching it again: Okay I have to correct myself, you might be right. Maybe it just looked like more than it was because he moves so quickly. But it still looks odd to me.
	::It does look a bit odd. I just like to think that it's because the back of Strong Bad's head looks the same whichever way it's turned. {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 15:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		::It does look a bit odd. I just like to think that it's because the back of Strong Bad's head looks the same whichever way it's turned. {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 15:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
		+	:::I just checked it. The only thing that moves is SB's mask. Although what kinda threw me off a little was the highlight on the right (a viewer's left) of his reflection's mask. When actually played, it ''does'' look a bit like his actual head moved, but that doesn't seem to be the case. {{User:DevonM/sig}} 16:55, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Bluebry: /* His head doesn't move */ reply

Bluebry — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 15:05:55 GMT

His head doesn't move: reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:05, 2 July 2008
Line 56:		Line 56:
	:The way I see it, he DID move his head, but his face was still not in view of the camera. {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 14:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)		:The way I see it, he DID move his head, but his face was still not in view of the camera. {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 14:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
	* No, his head really didn't move at all. I can't describe it any better... but his reflection didn't just turn its face, it actually moved the head in a way that would have had to be visible even without the face.--[[User:Cass from Germany\|Cass from Germany]] 14:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)-> after watching it again: Okay I have to correct myself, you might be right. Maybe it just looked like more than it was because he moves so quickly. But it still looks odd to me.		* No, his head really didn't move at all. I can't describe it any better... but his reflection didn't just turn its face, it actually moved the head in a way that would have had to be visible even without the face.--[[User:Cass from Germany\|Cass from Germany]] 14:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)-> after watching it again: Okay I have to correct myself, you might be right. Maybe it just looked like more than it was because he moves so quickly. But it still looks odd to me.
		+	::It does look a bit odd. I just like to think that it's because the back of Strong Bad's head looks the same whichever way it's turned. {{User:Bluebry/sig}} 15:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)