User talk:BanditoDorito
From Homestar Runner Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
(You win!) |
(and don't edit anyone's talk posts except your own.) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==No edit warring== | ==No edit warring== | ||
| - | Just so you know, we tend to discourage adding the same content repeatedly if it continues to be removed. This is known as edit warring, and it is not productive. If you believe that the content should be there, and everyone else keeps removing it, you can take it to the talk page and try to argue your point there. In the case of [[Teen Girl Squad Issue 13]], you have been reverted six times already by three different users, all for good reasons. What So and So said is a [[blatant lie]] | + | Just so you know, we tend to discourage adding the same content repeatedly if it continues to be removed. This is known as edit warring, and it is not productive. If you believe that the content should be there, and everyone else keeps removing it, you can take it to the talk page and try to argue your point there. In the case of [[Teen Girl Squad Issue 13]], you have been reverted six times already by three different users, all for good reasons. What So and So said is a [[blatant lie]]. And regarding the "stopping him" issue: y'all were both right because if you read carefully, "stopping him" is not the same as "trying to stop him". If you still think the information should be there, please add a section to [[Talk:Teen Girl Squad Issue 13|the talk page]] and try to argue your points there. Please don't re-add the information to the page itself, as consensus is currently against having it there. {{User:The Knights Who Say Ni/sig}} 17:30, 26 May 2012 (UTC) |
| - | You know WHAT!?!? I don't give a crap anymore! I don't know why you guys won't agree with me, but fine! There is really no freaking reward from winning this, and really, this would be an empty victory. It's useless info anyway. There might not even be a right answer, but who cares? So congrats; you all win, so no more on the subject. | + | :You know WHAT!?!? I don't give a crap anymore! I don't know why you guys won't agree with me, but fine! There is really no freaking reward from winning this, and really, this would be an empty victory. It's useless info anyway. There might not even be a right answer, but who cares? So congrats; you all win, so no more on the subject. |
| - | BTW: It is considered a logical fallacy to say that, because something has no proof, it is wrong. Lookit up! | + | :BTW: It is considered a logical fallacy to say that, because something has no proof, it is wrong. Lookit up! |
| + | ::You're absolutely right about that last thing. I never expressed an opinion on the subject; I just said that this is how our wiki views speculation. We only document what we know to be true. There's no way to say for sure that Mrs. Tompkinsrobotmomerson gave Tompkins such an early bedtime if they didn't tell us directly. (and i didn't say "wrong", i said "assumed [to be] wrong". Assumptions can be incorrect.) Also, even if she did set Tompkins's bedtime to be well before 5 in the afternoon, don't you think by that same logic that she would be mad that he wasn't in bed yet when So and So got there? She isn't. So it's still not past his bedtime yet. And I don't think I ever told you to give up; I said twice that if you still thought the information should be there, to ask about it in the talk page. {{User:The Knights Who Say Ni/sig}} 21:17, 29 May 2012 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 21:17, 29 May 2012
No edit warring
Just so you know, we tend to discourage adding the same content repeatedly if it continues to be removed. This is known as edit warring, and it is not productive. If you believe that the content should be there, and everyone else keeps removing it, you can take it to the talk page and try to argue your point there. In the case of Teen Girl Squad Issue 13, you have been reverted six times already by three different users, all for good reasons. What So and So said is a blatant lie. And regarding the "stopping him" issue: y'all were both right because if you read carefully, "stopping him" is not the same as "trying to stop him". If you still think the information should be there, please add a section to the talk page and try to argue your points there. Please don't re-add the information to the page itself, as consensus is currently against having it there. 
The Knights Who Say Ni 
17:30, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- You know WHAT!?!? I don't give a crap anymore! I don't know why you guys won't agree with me, but fine! There is really no freaking reward from winning this, and really, this would be an empty victory. It's useless info anyway. There might not even be a right answer, but who cares? So congrats; you all win, so no more on the subject.
- BTW: It is considered a logical fallacy to say that, because something has no proof, it is wrong. Lookit up!
- You're absolutely right about that last thing. I never expressed an opinion on the subject; I just said that this is how our wiki views speculation. We only document what we know to be true. There's no way to say for sure that Mrs. Tompkinsrobotmomerson gave Tompkins such an early bedtime if they didn't tell us directly. (and i didn't say "wrong", i said "assumed [to be] wrong". Assumptions can be incorrect.) Also, even if she did set Tompkins's bedtime to be well before 5 in the afternoon, don't you think by that same logic that she would be mad that he wasn't in bed yet when So and So got there? She isn't. So it's still not past his bedtime yet. And I don't think I ever told you to give up; I said twice that if you still thought the information should be there, to ask about it in the talk page.
The Knights Who Say Ni 
21:17, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- You're absolutely right about that last thing. I never expressed an opinion on the subject; I just said that this is how our wiki views speculation. We only document what we know to be true. There's no way to say for sure that Mrs. Tompkinsrobotmomerson gave Tompkins such an early bedtime if they didn't tell us directly. (and i didn't say "wrong", i said "assumed [to be] wrong". Assumptions can be incorrect.) Also, even if she did set Tompkins's bedtime to be well before 5 in the afternoon, don't you think by that same logic that she would be mad that he wasn't in bed yet when So and So got there? She isn't. So it's still not past his bedtime yet. And I don't think I ever told you to give up; I said twice that if you still thought the information should be there, to ask about it in the talk page.
